forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Docbook as forrest-plugin
Date Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:25:43 GMT
Sean Wheller wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 October 2004 01:24, Rick Tessner wrote:
...
>>Right now, we seem to be stuck on this idea of the intermediate format
>>which I think we're all agreed we need in order to be able to present a
>>consistent look and feel.  
>>Currently, that format is document-v12 and in 
>>the future will be a subset of XHTML 1.0 or 2.0.
> 
> Ouch there we go again, that word "subset." When will forrest do it properly? 
> Can we really expect Forrest to be a robust product system if we put it in a 
> box. I am happy with XHTMLX.X, but not a "subset." I won't ramble on as to 
> why.

http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/

For example, we won't even think to start implementing these modules in 
the beginning:

# 22. Ruby Module
# 23. XHTML Scripting Module
# 27. XForms Module
# 28. XML Events Module

And for example, we will not do this, as it mixes style in the content:

# 24. XHTML Style Attribute Module

...
> XHTML FULL IS NOT an INTERNAL FORMAT it is a TRANSITIONAL STANDARD FORMAT.
> XHTML FORREST SUBSET IS an INTERNAL FORMAT it IS NOT a TRANSITIONAL STANDARD.

No nead to shout :-)

> XHTML extends beyond forrest. When I think "internal format" I think 
> "proprietary", like the document VX and "subset of XHTML."

Here is the misunderstanding. For us internal == used internally, not 
proprietary. We are giving different meanings.

And also note that a subset of XHTML2 is not necessarily proprietary, as 
it's modular.

...
>>Thoughts?
>>
>>I do have a couple of concerns tho:
>>
>>1.  I used Docbook a few years back and the performance was not a
>>     wonderous thing due to all the imports / includes that were
>>     necessary as part of its modular design.  Might not be the
>>     best for a servlet based Forrest site.
> 
> Yes, it can be heavy. Performance will reduce on large documents, books, sets. 
> For small documents like articles it is not a problem.

Our reasoning is that for small documents XHTML is more than adeguate.
IOW DocBook is too heavy for those documents where is't more needed :-)

...
>>2.  What about the wholesite.pdf / wholesite.html / tabs-as-pdf bits?
>>     I don't have a good enough feel for Forrest yet as to what would
>>     happen here.
> 
> Good question? Won't it work the same as it does now?

If we pipe it into the intermediate format (we call it 'internal'), then 
it will still all work.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message