forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>
Subject Re: document-v12
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:42:53 GMT
Hi,

I've finished adding document-v12, which removes most of the annoying
structural limitations in document-v11 and makes the content model more
HTML-like.  The changes are listed on the sample page:

http://xml.apache.org/forrest/document-v12.html

There are new DTDs for document-v12, faq-v12, howto-v12, changes-v12 and
todo-v12, which all use document-v12.mod.  I have converted the Forrest
docs and seed site to use these.

A bit of technical background..

Previously, our DTD defined 'inline' and 'block' entities, and elements
like li, tr and dd used 'inline' with ad-hoc extensions (most recently,
Steven's DTD commit).  Examining the xhtml1-strict DTD (which is very
clean and readable), I found they define a third type, 'flow', which
merges inline and block:

<!ENTITY % flow "%content.mix;|%blocks;">

So I copied the xhtml DTD, and now 'flow' is used in document-v12 by dd,
li, td and th.  This fixes most issues mentioned in
etc/DTD_DEFICIENCIES.txt, as well as Stephan Schlierf's request for lists
(ol|ul|dl) inside <td>.

The DTD changelog summarizes the changes since document-v11 as:

[Version 1.2]
  20030320 Make @href required for link elements. (SNS)
  20030320 Allow links (link|jump|fork) and inline elements (br|img|icon|acronym) inside title.
(SNS)
  20030419 Allow inline content (strong|em|code|sub|sup|br|img|icon|acronym|link|jump|fork)
in strong and em. (JT)
  20030419 Allow paragraphs (p|source|note|warning|fixme), table and figure|anchor inside
li. (JT)
  20030419 Allow paragraphs (p|source|note|warning|fixme), lists (ol|ul|dl), table, figure|anchor
inside dd. (JT)
  20030419 Allow paragraphs (p|source|note|warning|fixme), lists (ol|ul|dl), table, figure|anchor
inside tables (td|dh). (JT)


The only change I didn't make was fix the bug that allows <li><li>, which
is invalid HTML.  I left this because:
 - having 100% backwards-compatibility in the 1.x DTD series is a very
   valuable thing, even if only from a marketing POV.
 - we can render this bug harmless with some stylesheet cleverness.

So apart from the possibility of fixing @title in the FAQ and Howto DTDs,
I think DTDs are in order for a 0.5 release.


--Jeff

Mime
View raw message