forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <thors...@apache.org>
Subject ASF Standard for site.xml aka sitetree.xml (was Re: Eclipse based site.xml editor)
Date Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:07:27 GMT
On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 08:43 +0200, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> > Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
> > 
> >> Ross Gardler wrote:
> >>
> >>> Well, in that case I would avoid EMF for this instance and we need
> >>> not consider whether site.xml is to have a DTD or not. Just a tree
> >>> editor with configurable properties on each node will do just fine.
> >>
> >> the completely free-form site.xml where each node can have pretty much
> >> any element name doesn't lend itself to a schema / DTD easily. maybe
> >> it would be useful to revisit that decision and switch to a system
> >> where you have
> >>
> >> <node id="uniqueid" href="index.html" label="About"/>
> >>
> >> this would also enforce that each node has a unique id and is
> >> therefore addressable by site:uniqueid
> >>
> >> WDYT?
> > 
> > I think we discussed this to death already ;-)
> > 
> > There are good reasons for us not doing that (all related to the site:
> > protocol if I remember correctly). There have been a few proposals for a
> > DTD but none have had a strong enough use case to warrant us disabling
> > the site: protocol. The current practice is that if we need a valid site
> > structure document then we simply create a internal plugin (like the
> > IMSManifest plugin) for it.
> > 
> > Of course, no such decision is ever final. If someone wants to go
> > through the archives and make a new proposal we'll consider it.
> 
> Ok, here it comes :-)
> 
> One thing is the *internal* representation, that must be kept as now
> because of the way the site: protocol works. But this does not mean that
> we cannot decide to make the _default_ external representation be different.
> 
> Personally, I would support we change the default external
> representation to something akin to what Gregor proposes, and in
> particular the same as the Lenya one.
> 
> I would be even more supportive if Lenya and Cocoon adopt the Maven one,
> so that we would have a single format for all these projects.
> 

You mean http://maven.apache.org/maven2/site.html ?

The section "Creating a Site Descriptor" has an example. 

salu2
-- 
thorsten

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


Mime
View raw message