Mailing-List: contact forrest-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:56:31 +1000
From: Jeff Turner <jefft@apache.org>
To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Data models (Re: Fixing menus)
Message-ID: <20030410105631.GB17214@expresso.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
References: <20030408170000.GC3007@expresso.localdomain>
 <3E93016A.3050109@apache.org> <20030409045702.GB2113@expresso.localdomain>
 <3E93DDA6.8050409@apache.org> <20030409161836.GF2113@expresso.localdomain>
 <3E9449C7.80508@apache.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3E9449C7.80508@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 06:26:47PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Jeff Turner wrote, On 09/04/2003 18.18:
...
> >OTOH, navigation.xml can precisely define a special menu for a directory,
> >something site.xml can't do.
> 
> So it seems that site.xml is a superset of navigation.xml, and that with 
> a few additions it can be even better.

If we could allow a site.xml per directory which augments a central
site.xml, then it would be a superset of what book.xml/navigation.xml
offers.

...
> Hmmm, ok, conceded. I put it in Gump's descriptor for my projects, but 
> somewhere we decided not to go that way IIRC. What would you say about 
> it now?

I think we should perhaps define a specification of what data we need for
a Forrest site, and then figure out how to represent it as a:
 - Gump descriptor
 - Maven descriptor
 - Custom XML for people who don't care about Gump/Maven

This abstract data model should include the directory layout of the site,
currently captured in forrest.properties.

We could have a sitemap pipeline to convert external formats into a
common internal format.

Haven't really thought this out though.

> >>and that's why I talk about putting in site.xml, that is where users
> >>would maybe look how to config the site... just ramblings, leave it, I
> >>have no real intention of changing it, and overmore I don't have clear
> >>alternatives myself.
> >
> >That's where I'm at too: not sure how to fix it, leaving it until things
> >become clearer.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Personally I like having that info in Gump descriptors. I am writing a 
> stylesheet that takes gump's merged descriptors and makes a site out of 
> it, *also* with the infos like the ones above.
> 
> Given that Maven can create a Gumpo descriptor from his already, I tend 
> to think that we could use the Gump descriptor for it.
> 
> Not that sure though, I might not be seeing nasty implications.

Sounds alright to me.

--Jeff

> -- 
> Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
>             - verba volant, scripta manent -
>    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------