Mailing-List: contact forrest-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 08:34:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: images, images and more images
In-Reply-To: <20030710115152.GD3351@expresso.localdomain>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307100825450.12990-100000@dell>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Jeff Turner wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 09:40:40PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> >   ok, first point.  i found it initially confusing that the file
> > "forrest.properties" defines an explicit project.images-dir directory,
> > whose name is conveniently "images/", yet the references to images
> > in skinconf.xml must (apparently) be listed relative to the parent
> > "resources" directory.  this is not at all intuitive.
> 
> What should it be relative to?  If it helps, in 0.6 we're planning to
> make it relative to content/.

one would think that, if the "forrest.properties" file defines an
explicit directory called the images directory, why wouldn't it
be relative to that?  what is the function of that option in the
forrest.properties file, if not to identify where images are to be
found?
 
> Currently, project.images-dir locates the images directory in the
> _source_.  Forrest then builds a webapp in the standardized format the
> the sitemap expects.  In this standardized format, the directory is
> always called 'images'.
> 
> The easiest way to see how things work is to build a webapp ('forrest
> webapp'), and then look at the sitemaps. 

sorry, i'm not sure what you're saying here.  i'll go back and read
the docs more carefully, but from my perspective as a newbie, i look
at it as that my images *are* in the "source".  i just think this 
distinction needs to be explained more carefully somehow.  as a newbie,
if i see something identifying an images directory, i naturally assume
that's where i should put my images and that's where the app will look
for them.
 
> >   second point.  although i mentioned this before, forrest does bad
> > things with files that end with ".jpg", but not ".jpeg".  definitely
> > non-intuitive.
> 
> If you update to CVS Forrest, this should now be fixed.  Forrest will no
> longer rewrite extensions.

excellent.
 
> > that is, is that directory and all of its subdirectories entirely
> > self-contained?  because if i look in the images/ directory in that
> > directory, i find exactly:
> > 
> >   built-with-forrest-button.png
> >   tinytux.png
> > 
> > and *no* linuxpower.jpeg file.  why not?
> 
> Is that file ever referred to in the XML?  Forrest spiders the site, so
> if it never encountered a reference to 'images/linuxpower.jpeg' it
> wouldn't appear in build/site/images/.  Perhaps you are referring to it
> as 'images/linuxpower.jpg'?

believe me, i flogged this for most of yesterday evening.  if i replaced
the reference to linuxpower.jpeg with a PNG file, it rendered nicely.
when i switched it back, the generated HTML *did* refer to the linuxpower
file, but that file was never copied into the build/site hierarchy,
thus no image.  so the generated HTML was, in fact, correct.  it was
just the file that was never copied over.

is there any possible way that this spidering fails to copy the .jpeg
file, while successfully copying, say, a .png file?  i'll test it some
more later today.


rday

--

Robert P. J. Day
Eno River Technologies
Unix, Linux and Open Source training
Waterloo, Ontario

www.enoriver.com