forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@indexgeo.com.au>
Subject Re: newbie question -- book.xml versus site.xml
Date Fri, 04 Jul 2003 14:54:13 GMT
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > 
<snip stuff that we need to clarify in the docs/>
> 
> my confusion regarding those two files stemmed from the fact
> that book.xml uses tags that can clearly validated against
> a DTD, but the tags in the site.xml file appear to be arbitrary,
> and are chosen to reflect however you want to refer to those
> elements from another book.xml file.  for anyone used to XML
> files and DTDs and validation, that might cause a bit of a
> double take to see element names just appearing out of thin air
> with no DTD for validation.  that is, if i understand that correctly.

You have it right. Radical, isn't it. It does work nicely though.
Don't worry, we are xml-heads too. Validation and DTDs are important
in certain circumstances. However, with the site.xml we need to be
liberal.

I do have loose RELAX NG validation of site.xml in my local working
copy to ensure a well-structured, well-formed site.xml ... will commit
that soon.

> second point: i did build a sample site already, and have numerous
> .xml pages in subdirectories, and since i stuck to using book.xml
> files at the top level and in the subdirectories, yes, i'm already
> tired of hacking each book.xml file to add or delete "../".  ack.
> 
> if i want to switch to use a site.xml file, do i need only the
> single top-level site.xml file, while all subdirectories would
> use a book.xml file incorporating the "site:" syntax?

I have not tried a mixture of site and book. Does it work for you?
Yes, there is certainly only one site.xml and it goes at the top-level.

> from the forrest 0.4 release notes, i read:
> 
>    book.xml files in subdirectories can now use site: URLs, removing the
>      hassle of updating adding/deleting ..'s.
> 
> so i read that as, a single top-level site.xml, and book.xml
> files in all subdirectories, yes?  
> 
> and any "site:" references in those book.xml files would have
> to match the element names chosen for the site.xml file.

Please try it and see. I would imagine that it was designed to
be that powerful. If you can manage some patches to the documentation
to help clarify, that would be great.

> rday
> 
> p.s.  i am not trying to be verbose.  i am merely succeeding. :-)

:-) often being verbose is better, to clearly explain.

--David



Mime
View raw message