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 Sat, 14 Jun 2003 14:48:01 GMT

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 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

So if we decide that the user can control the position of (1) and (2) we 
can have the Maven-like layout.

  documentation
    xdocs
      raw
    resources
      stylesheets
      conf
      lib
      classes
    skins
     skinname
       images
       stylesheets


What can xdocs contain?

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

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.

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, IIUC the last thing to decide is the default layout.
Should we do:

(1)
  documentation
    content
      raw
      xdocs
    resources
    skins

or

(2)
  documentation
    content
    raw
    resources
    skins

or

(3)
  documentation
    xdocs
      raw
    resources
    skins


(1) is the most similar to what we have now. It just creates the raw dir 
inside content instead of itself.

(2) has no hierarchy but is inconsistent with the MVC screnario.

(3) is not conceptually clean, as it precludes us to have xdocs in a 
/raw directory, and has inner nesting. But it's like the Maven layout, 
so we could still decide to go for it for other reasons.

I'd say in turn (1)-(3)-(2).

What do especially *users* think?

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


Mime
View raw message