forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Cleaning Forrest source directory madness
Date Fri, 13 Jun 2003 09:20:49 GMT

MAISONOBE Luc wrote, On 12/06/2003 14.33:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote :
> 
>> Scenario A (multiple dirs)
>>
>>   content        all stuff to be "digested" by Forrest
>>     xdocs        xml document-dtd files
>>     html         html files
>>     wiki
>>     ...
>>   resources      all stuff to be referenced as-is
>>     images
>>     scripts
>>     styles
>>     files
>>     ...
>>   global         all stuff to be referenced as-is and is always relative
>>     images
>>     scripts
>>     styles
>>     files
>>     ...
>>
>> Scenario B (single dirs)
>>   content        all stuff to be "digested" by Forrest
>>    <here goes mixed content>
>>   resources      all stuff to be referenced as-is
>>    <here goes mixed resources>
>>   global         all stuff to be referenced as-is and is always relative
>>    <here goes mixed global>
> 
> 
> The more I think about it, the more I prefer scenario B.
...
> The upper level (content vs. resources vs.global), which is the same in 
> both proposals seems fine to drive forrest behaviour.
> 
> File type organisation, IMHO, should be let to the user and be at the 
> lowest level.

This is also what I believe. So it seems that there is a need for this, 
even with other users.

But as I told Juan Jose, we have to cater also for other users that 
prefer the other scenario.

> Target site structure, should probably not be specified here. Isn't the 
> site.xml file specifically designed for that ? Couldn't this file take 
> care of all this structuring (including resources and global) and be 
> moved up in the hierarchy (at the same level as content, resources and 
> global, or above, next to status.xml ? 

Hmmm, conceptually I understand, but practically? Site.xml does not 
contain all files... hmmm...

> By the why is this status.xml 
> file this high in the directory tree ?

Because it's more about the project than the docs, so it's with the 
project root. Not sure if it's right, but this is nevertheless the 
reason. ;-)

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


Mime
View raw message