forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r279511 - /forrest/trunk/whiteboard/plugins/org.apache.forrest.plugin.internal.xhtml2/resources/stylesheets/xhtml2_to_html.xsl
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2005 13:47:11 GMT
I've reverted my changes as requested.  I'll lay low until I see where
you're going with this.  Perhaps I don't understand views as well as I
thought, but I don't see that the output side of them works on xdoc,
but rather the resultant html of document2html.

Either way, I'm deleting my local changes and svn up occasionally to
see where you're going.
--tim

On 9/9/05, Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org> wrote:
> Tim Williams wrote:
> > On 9/9/05, Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>twilliams@apache.org wrote:
> >>
> >>>Author: twilliams
> >>>Date: Wed Sep  7 21:40:42 2005
> >>>New Revision: 279511
> >>>
> >>>URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=279511&view=rev
> >>>Log:
> >>>can't return all the html, head, stuff for insertion in the pipeline.  temporary
solution to get on with pipeline testing
> >>
> >>Why do you want the output to look like document2html output and then be
> >>passed into the existing pipelines?
> >
> >
> > Because that's how views work right now.  I didn't have this grand
> > redesign scheme in my mind at the time.  I thought we were getting
> > XHTML2 to work with the current views and replacing the **body-*.html
> > aggregation "part" in the **page pipeline with an xthml2tohtml
> > equivalent was how I did it.
> 
> Views as they are now, work with XDoc. The goal is to make core work
> with XHTML2 not XDoc. It is not possible to include views in this work
> *and* not do a level of redesign in views (or the old skin system).
> 
> >>Don't we just want XHTML2 -> output plugin = desired output
> >
> >
> > That's what it is, but views operate on html structured like the
> > output of document2html.  I wasn't redesigning views, just getting
> > xhtml2 to work with them.
> 
> So here you are saying the same as Thorsten.
> 
> >>Meaning we only need an XHTML2_to_HTML stylesheet>
> >>
> >>(I recall a conversation Tim and I had on IRC in which he asked me why
> >>we need the XHTML2HTML stylesheet. I seem to remember the answer I gave
> >>was misleading to say the least. Hopefully recent discussions about the
> >>new pipeline will have clarified - if not I'll try agian when I
> >>understand the intent of this commit, I may be missing something)
> >>
> >>Ross
> >
> >
> > I could very well be missing something but like I tried to explain in
> > the other thread, to get xhtml2 to work with views (or the current
> > skins for that matter) we need two things:
> > 1) a xslt that outputs html with the same structure of document2html
> > 2) a change in the **page pipeline to call that instead of **body-*.html
> 
> Well this is where the "division" needs to be called. In my view it is a
> waste of effort refactoring the current skinning system to use XHTML2
> and then converting views to get rid of the body-** templates.
> 
> In my opinion we should skip the conversion of skins and work directly
> on views.
> 
> If you revert this commit and do svn up, you will see that the body-*
> part of the pipeline is working. All we need to do now is get views to
> work with site.xml source files to create the navigation (this is, a
> small step).
> 
> [NOTE] this work happens in the contracts *not* in the structurer
> sitemap so it does not prevent work proceeding with the refactoring of
> views.
> 
> > Even when we do what you suggest and use contracts for everything
> > instead of aggregation, the implementation of that contract will still
> > need something similar to this.
> 
> Why? I don't think this is the case (see my summary mails on return from
>   Apachecon and Thorsten expansion of that summary)
> 
> Ross
>

Mime
View raw message