Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-forrest-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 96245 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2003 23:10:30 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Sep 2003 23:10:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 81170 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2003 23:08:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-xml-forrest-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 81050 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2003 23:08:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact forrest-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list forrest-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 80632 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2003 23:07:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO main.gmane.org) (80.91.224.249) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Sep 2003 23:07:55 -0000 Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19wUpD-0003m1-00 for ; Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:49:35 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org Received: from sea.gmane.org ([80.91.224.252]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19wUpC-0003lt-00 for ; Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:49:34 +0200 Received: from news by sea.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19wUop-0008Bt-00 for ; Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:49:11 +0200 From: Jeff Turner Subject: Re: Claiming *.html (Re: cvs commit: xml-forrest/src/resources/conf forrest.xmap) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 08:49:09 +1000 Lines: 79 Message-ID: References: <20030908062705.19785.qmail@minotaur.apache.org> <20030908102731.GB1540@expresso.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: Sender: news X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > Jeff Turner wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:27:05AM -0000, nicolaken@apache.org wrote: >> >>> nicolaken 2003/09/07 23:27:05 >>> >>> Modified: src/resources/conf forrest.xmap >>> Log: >>> Add .html matcher as new way of defining ihtml pages. >> >> >> What happens if in 0.6, we decide to have a fully unified filesystem >> layout, where extension is the only way of differentiating raw and parsed >> content? >> >> That is more or less what I proposed in this thread: >> >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=105886875300001&r=1&w=2 >> >> And you agreed that it was a superset of the previously proposed >> solution, that of having a raw/ directory: >> >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=105894150226944&w=2 > > > Wait a sec, AFAIU it's not the extension that defines binary or not, but > an attribute in site.xml. > > You wrote: > > Well we can make binary=true an inheritable attribute then: > > > > > > ... > > I was thinking that although it's *possible* to have foo.html and bar.html treated differently, it would be pretty confusing for users. The extension provides a nice simple filetype marker. As an analogy, modern filesystems don't *rely* on extensions for identifying file type, but people use them anyway, as a visual type indicator. >> I don't want to limit our options in 0.6 for the minimal advantage of >> making *.ihtml easier to edit. So claim *.html if you want, but be aware >> that it may be redefined in 0.6. > > > I thought that we had agreed on this, Jeff, and I thought that this > commit was in line with what we had decided. > > IE: > - Add .html matcher as new way of defining ihtml pages > - Make namespaced content pass the pipeline (so we can add xhtml things > to xdoc pages for special cases, as like ehtml) > - deprecate ihtml and ehtml I'm not sure how processing *.html as ihtml counts as a first step down this road of supporting mixed-namespace documents. For a start, '.html' is the wrong extension, as it's XML, not HTML. Wouldn't it be better to graft HTML support onto doc-v12 instead of docv12 onto HTML? > I'd add now: > - add a class attribute to all tags > - add a user.css stylesheet so that users can easily change styles or > attach new things to class attribute meanings Great, but AFACT that's completely independent of ihtml, right? > Do you have other ideas now? > > I'm ok with rediscussing if you have other idea, just wanted to note > that I did this commit because I thought it was in line with the > decisions taken, not because I want to force things my way. Cool, just misunderstandings. It's been 7 months since 0.4, so I just want to get 0.5 out before we break some kind of ASF record for slackness ;) --Jeff