forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <thors...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Plugs in or skins ?
Date Thu, 07 Jul 2005 13:30:37 GMT
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 13:58 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Cyriaque Dupoirieux wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> >    I'm working on a plug in of my own (the first one !) to understand 
> > well the architecture.
> >    Now, I am nearly able to use the standard pelt skin instead of a sub 
> > skin I had created.
> >    But I wander where is the frontier between skins and plugs in ?
> 
> 
> There are three types of plugin:
> 
> input - converts an input format to our internal format (currently xdoc)
> output - converts our internal format to an *unskinned* output format
> internal - changes internal behaviour of Forrest (advanced users only)
> 
> As you can see a plugin should *never* affect the skinning process.
> 
> If you look at views you will find that they are currently an internal 
> plugin and a related output plugin. This is one of the reasons they are 
> still in the whiteboard. We will (probably) be creating a new kind of 
> plugin to handle skinning, and the current internal views plugin will 
> become part of core.
> 
> >    * For instance, the download example in the forrest documentation or
> >      the Faqs, don't you consider they should have been developed as
> >      plugs in just as ProjectInfo ?
> 
> Yes, but they are examples of extending a project without using plugins. 
> That is legacy documentation from before the existence of plugins. You 
> raise an interesting point - do we still need this feature? I agree that 
> the download example should certainly be a plugin and if we are to keep 
> the project extension mechanism we should think of a more appropriate 
> use case.
> 
> >    Since everything works as I wanted with my new plug in, I start to 
> > think that I don't need to create my own skin any more :
> > 
> >    if I want to extend the DTD to taken into account new tags, I can
> >    create an input plug in,
> >    If I want to change the layout of an existing tag, I can create an
> >    output plug in.
> > 
> >    Am I right ?
> 
> Your first statement is correct, but your second is not. An output 
> plugin creates an output format (HTML, voiceXML, text, POD etc.) it is 
> not responsible for describing how the document is laid out. Of course, 
> there are overlaps, for example text does not have a method of defining 
> presentation separately, but HTML certainly does.
> 
> >    (Maybe views will answer my existential questions...)
> 
> Yes, they will!
> 

Yes, please, Cyriaque, have a look into views. 

I reckon what you really want to do is writing your own viewHelper.xhtml
plugin. This plugin can be compared with the traditional "skin-packages"
like pelt. It provides contracts, css and a default view implementation
(html skeleton) like a skin with the advantage that a designer can
easily change parts or the whole lot of the skin without touching
contracts (xsl-code).

Please join us on developing views.

salu2
-- 
thorsten

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


Mime
View raw message