forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <>
Subject Re: Cleaning Forrest source directory madness
Date Sun, 15 Jun 2003 04:23:17 GMT
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 04:48:01PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Jeff Turner wrote, On 14/06/2003 12.47:
> ...
> >Would it help if we make xdoc processing the default, and put
> >copied-across content in a special directory:
> >
> >content/index.xml
> >content/raw/foo.html
> >
> >Then if we then renamed 'content' to 'xdocs', and moved images/ into
> >there, we'd have the Maven structure:
> >
> >xdocs/*.xml
> >xdocs/images/*.png
> >xdocs/raw/foo.html
> I don't like the name "xdocs" for a dir, but that's really a minor issue.

I don't like it much either, so let me rewrite that as..


I don't know.  I think we should do a 0.5 release with things as they are
currently, and then fix the problem properly in a future release.  "fix
properly" meaning, get rid of special purpose directories altogether, and
let the user partition things however they want.  Why try to _increase_
the amount of special directories in 0.5, when we really want to get rid
of them all in the future.

> I think I'm ok with this. More below.
> ...
> >How about:
> >
> > - Declaring images as 'content', and moving them under content/
> > - Keep resources for things that don't end up on the final site:
> >
> >resources/stylesheets
> >resources/conf            # Sitemaps, etc
> >resources/lib
> >resources/classes
> Hmmm, now it's easy just to copy the resorces dir with the stylesheets 
> and stuff, it would need some changes... but again, it makes sense.
> Ok, trying to recap and expand your proposal conceptually:
>  documentation
>    content -> model
>      - files to process (1)
>      - files not to process (2)
>    resources -> controller
>    skins -> view

That's a nice way to think of it.

> What can xdocs contain?
> - *.xml   (documentdtd, faq, changes, todo, status, etc)
> - *.html  (html4, to be tidied)
> - *.xhtml (xhtml1, xhtml2-dev)
> - *.wiki
> - *.png,gif,etc

(which makes 'xdocs' a rather bad name)

> Shall we negate the possibility of handling images in the xdocs dir? I 
> think no. Also because this does not preclude someone from putting them 
> in the /images/ dir and getting them from there. I'd do just that for 
> Forrest BTW.

Sorry, I didn't follow.  What /images/ directory?  For images, all I
suggest is that they be reclassified as content:


> IIUC Someone said that images are not content but view.
> Some images are, but other convey a message, and can be converted by 
> cocoon to be able to be viewed with a WAP phone for example.

So 'content' images would go in content/images/, and 'view' images go in



View raw message