forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Turner <>
Subject Re: Adding *.html matcher to xdocs
Date Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:41:21 GMT
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 07:22:34PM +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> We now have *.ihtml and *.ehtml matchers for html pages in the xdocs 
> dir. The rationale was that *.html files should have to be given "raw", 
> because of possible single-directory contents.
> But since we have decided to separate the directories that generate with 
> forrest from the "raw" ones, I propose that we add new matchers, as it 
> won't impact our users (just add, not remove).
> Currently we have the contents/ dir for raw, and the contents/xodcs dir 
> for generated.
> This is the proposal for the standard matchers to use in the xdocs dir 
> (deprecating old ones). These will all be converted to our intermediate 
> format.
>     *.xml    [all xml files, with automatic sourcetype check]
>     *.dbk    [docbook, used also with the xml pipeline, from Abiword]
>     *.html   [currently *.ihtml]
>     *.xhtml  [new pipeline, will also use future xhtml2 docs]
>     *.wiki   [as now]
>     *.gif,*.png [all images]
>     *.svg    [as now]
> Is there something missing? (asciiart?)
> What remains out of this is the *.ehtml stuff. Any idea?

That is my question also.  The different extension serves to disambiguate
how the HTML is treated (as a doc-v11 flavour or simply well-formed

If anything, I propose we get rid of *.ihtml and rename *.ehtml to
*.html, since:
 - ihtml has been broken for most of 0.5's development
 - I don't think many (any?) people use it
 - masquerading our nice semantic doc-v12 as HTML seems like a bad idea
   to begin with, because users have no idea what they *can't* put in


> -- 
> Nicola Ken Barozzi         
>             - verba volant, scripta manent -
>    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

View raw message