forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: xhtml2 tonights update & questions
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:11:34 GMT
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> 
>>>2) when we detect some other source format then its
>>>input plugin will transform to xhtml2 (e.g. the
>>>Apache document-v* formats). Even html and xhtml1
>>>could be input plugins, though the TR document
>>>has them happening in the core.
>>
>>The TR needs to change then. The only thing that should be in core is XHTML2
>>
>>
>>>3) Step 3 Filtering adds more xhtml2 content to
>>>the overall structure.
>>>
>>>Now at what stage does our process transform from
>>>the internal xhtml2 to some presentation format,
>>>for example HTML4. The current TR document shows
>>>that Step 4 is that point.
>>
>>I interpret it like that too. Step 4 is the output plugins stage, i.e. 
>>transformation to the final rendering language.
>>
>>This step is misleading in the TR because it is called "viewing" it has 
>>nothing to do with viewing (that is step 3). Perhaps we should change 
>>the title of this stage to "Translation".
> 
> 
> Today while answering this email and reading that TR doc,
> i had the idea to review the name of each Step to make
> it very clear.
> 
> I could not decide on a name for Step 4. The closest
> choice was "Windower" ... creating a window on the
> whole thing* through which gain the view. The "view"
> is bigger than the window.
> 
> * The "thing" is the XML stream, model, structure, whatever
> we call it.

Windower is good. If we think if the other common use of the term 
"window", i.e. a window on a desktop, it provides the definition of a 
visual organisation of a "thing". The actual look and feel of that 
window is dependant on a subsequent theme. In other words, it is the 
same as what we have here.

> I would like to edit this TR doc, but i am not sure about
> the file naming or the format.
> site-author/content/xdocs/TR/2004/WD-forrest10.html
> Going to copy that to TR/2005/WD-forrest10.html
> and continue with the raw HTML format with embedded style.

I'm not sure about that.

> Should i delete the 2004 or leave it?

The W3C have a header in their TR's that say "The latest version of this 
TR is available from ....". Perhaps we could follow their model and add 
such a header. The URL would not be dated and we will use the LM to 
ensure it points at the corret document.

Ross

Mime
View raw message