forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Piroumian Konstantin <KPiroum...@protek.com>
Subject RE: import of xml.apache.org main site into forrest
Date Wed, 05 Jun 2002 10:37:02 GMT
> From: Steven Noels [mailto:stevenn@outerthought.org] 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> some mysterious motivational wind was blowing in my direction this
> evening, and I went haywire after my last visit to the ugly
> xml.apache.org main site.
> 
> Result:
> 
> - I've run all docs in the {xml-site}/sources/xml-site through the new
> docv10->docv11 translation stylesheet, tweaked the result 
> manually, and
> imported the result of this into
> {xml-forrest}/src/documentation/content/xdocs/xml-site/
> - I rewrote the website.xml that came with it to our book.xml syntax,
> and added a link to the xml-site directory in our main book.xml
> 
> If all goes well, we have a draft version of the main xml.apache.org
> site at www.krysalis.org/forrest/xml-site/ after forrestbot 
> has done its
> job.

Looks not much better than the original site and much more boring ;(
Do you remember about the proposed xml.apache.org site design in
src/resources/layout/xml.apache.org/site.html? A while ago I've sent an
XML/XSLT made from it with a semantical markup (specific to the xml.apache
site, but it could be used for jakarta as well), but it was
rejected/forgotten for several reasons.

Is there a vision on how another design/layout can be used for site
generation without using some specific markup or something more advanced
than the document-v11-dtd? Isn't it for documents and not sites?

Konstantin

> 
> What has this 3 hour exercise taught me:
> 
> - if the state of the other projects xml source files is 
> comparable with
> those of the main site, we will need some thorough editorial review
> after migrating projects to forrest - people have been rather creative
> with the elements allowed by the old v10 DTD - using section-level
> elements instead of lists, inserting non-breakable spaces for 
> table-like
> layout, <br>'s inside list items to mimick definition lists, etc... I
> haven't done much to solve these issues - so there's plenty 
> of work for
> the editorially challenged amongst us :-)
> 
> - we need to do something with the 'link' situation. Joerg, 
> David et al,
> let's prepare a vote on this and resolve this thing. Now.
> 
> - Please have a look at
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-site/sources/website.xml
?rev=1.27&
content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup which is the 'old' book.xml as has
been used by the now defunct stylebook. I see <hidden> and <external>
and I find these quite interesting. Your ideas?

- Previous xdocs didn't require an authors element being filled in - how
will be solve this? Making authors optional again?

- Auto-generation of mini TOC's - should this be parametrizable? TOCs
are generated now if sections exist within sections in a document, which
was good for the forrest docs so far, but suboptimal for the content
imported from the main site. On the other hand, these imported docs have
been abusing the DTD to obtain certain visual effects, IMNSHO - so we
could fix the docs, too.

- The bert skin - in general, I think the body text is a point (or two)
too big - there isn't too much text on a screen. Bert, can we fix this?
I know I can change the settings of my browser, but I believe the
default font-size is 12pt, which is simply too big, showing too little
content on a 1024*768 screen.

Please review the result of this little transition exercise and post
other issues you come across with.

Regards,

</Steven>

Mime
View raw message