forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>
Subject Re: resource directory clarification
Date Sun, 06 Jul 2003 02:39:25 GMT
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:23:19AM -0700, Farr, Aaron wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> I've been using forrest for a while and we'll now be moving our department
> internal site to forrest, but after reading the documentation and the
> mailing list archives I'm still confused about the purpose of the
> src/documentation/resources directory.

Resources are things that are necessary for rendering the site, but not
directly displayed themselves (not content).

Examples of server-side resources are XSLT stylesheets and custom DTDs.
Examples of client-side resources are Javascript and CSS files.

I would say that images are content, not resources, and that they are
incorrectly classified currently.  There is a historical reason [1] for
this; we'll fix it in Forrest 0.6.

> General question is should these sort of directories:
>   /images
>   /scripts
>   /style

In Forrest 0.4 and 0.5, you would use:

src/documentation/resources/images
src/documentation/resources/scripts
src/documentation/resources/css

>   ...
> reside in /resources or in /content.
> 
> My first impression is that they belong in /resources, but if I understand
> correctly that requires a patch to work correctly.  Is there a consensus on
> this?  What will forrest 0.5 support?

AFAIK no patch should be necessary for images, *.js and *.css.

HTH,


--Jeff

> Thanks!
> 
> J. Aaron Farr
>   SONY ELECTRONICS
>   DDP-CIM
>   (724) 696-7653


[1] _Originally_, a resource was simply something that could be
referenced from anywhere in the site, with a well-known path.  That is
why images are in resources -- so that you can have <img
src="images/foo.gif"> anywhere in your site, and it will link to the
correct image.

The rationale for the original definition has proven faulty; it's all
very well being able to write <img src="images/foo.gif"> from index.xml
and subdir/index.xml, but then in the output, we'll have two copies of
the image:

foo.gif
subdir/foo.gif

Meaning that browsers can't just cache the image once for the whole site.

Mime
View raw message