forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@indexgeo.com.au>
Subject Re: XHTML2 I have read it and I like it... GO READ IT!
Date Wed, 14 Aug 2002 07:49:43 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> An interesting article on XHTML2, for those who don't
> want to read the spec :-P
> 
> http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/08/07/deviant.html
> 
> Since there has been quite a good reception on switching the documentDTD 
> over to a profile of XHTML2wd, I think that maybe the best thing could 
> be to make a branch, change there the DTD, check that it all works, and 
> ask a vote for a branch switch.
> 
> What do you think?

I think that you are reading a lot into a short discussion.
We should wait until there are some DTDs available. We need
the next Working Draft. Also i browsed their recent discussion
archives and this makes me feel that it is too early.

We need to allow time for more discussion on whether this is
the way to go. Some prime Forrest people are away.

When it does come time for this, is it better to experiment
in Forrest's scratchpad, rather than manage branches?
We already have some scratchpad build targets for doing
transformation and processing of other document types.
--David

> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > 
> > Bruno Dumon wrote:
> > 
> >> Thanks for the feedback, Nicola.
> >>
> >> When I was writing my message I was thinking about pure documentation.
> >>
> >> However, it seems that the forrest dtd should be more some kind of
> >> intermediate format between the content sources and the actual
> >> presentation. In that case, I think that it urgently needs more
> >> flexibility and features, and html is then of course the logical and
> >> appropriate choice.
> > 
> > 
> > Yes.
> > General documentation can be written directly via this dtd, and also 
> > general content can use this, but more specific DTDs can simply use this 
> >  in some parts (see faq and howto DTDs) or simply use it as an 
> > intermediate format (JavadocXML).
> > 
> >> BTW, as for html 4 and the deprecated presentation markup: it was
> >> already removed in the strict dtd, which is the recommended one. Of
> >> course xhtml2 is still cleaner in that regard.
> > 
> > 
> > Yup :-)
> > 
> >> On Sun, 2002-08-11 at 22:52, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>
> >>> Bruno Dumon wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 23:44, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> XHTML2 working draft
> >>>>> http://www.w3c.org/TR/2002/WD-xhtml2-20020805/Overview.html#toc
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >> [big snip]




Mime
View raw message