forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] HTML as base Forrest format
Date Sat, 01 Jan 2005 16:35:15 GMT
El sáb, 01-01-2005 a las 14:47, Ross Gardler escribió:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> > 
> > I would propose that we clearly state that HTML is the preferred source 
> > format for Forrest sites, and remove xdocs from the site template.
> > 
> > This seems a bit backwards with the XHTML2 stuff, but I don't think so.
> > 
> > The important thing is that (X)HTML(1|2) is used as a source format, so 
> > that many editors can be used and impedence on Forrest usage is 
> > minimized. The internals of Forrest are not generally known by users.
> > 
> > This can also make it easier for us to do a step towards XHTML2, as we 
> > will need to put in the HTML handling the same things that will go in 
> > the 2 version.
> > 
> > WDOT?
> I am +1 for this, the main reasoning for my arguments are:
> - all of the Nicola's observations above
> - further work on the HTMLEditor plugin will provide in browser WYSIWYG 
> editing under forrest run or a webapp (I intend to do this work in 
> February, if it hasn't already been done)
> - over at Burrokeet we are already using HTML as the base format, and it 
> works well. There are a couple of things with the HTML2doc stylesheet 
> that need ironing out, but nothing major.
> - it will provide a clearer route to integrating things like the Docbook 
> stylesheets (which output HTML)
> Ross

If we give up xdocs, then we have to use XHTML (1|2). 

-1 on HTML.

We need a valid input format and I have seen too many editors that
produces screwed up invalid html.

"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)

View raw message