forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: Menu Overhead Problem (and an offer to fix it)
Date Sun, 20 Nov 2005 16:06:22 GMT
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
>>I didn't really follow the example. It would be easier for me to grasp
>>if you gave an example of what you get with default Forrest and an 
>>example of what you want.
> Atm when I navigate to a page that is not visible part of a menu (for
> example by following a link within a page), I'm currently loosing
> context because the menues will collapse.
> What I want is to maintain context without creating a permanent menu entry
> for every page in a site.

OK, I got it that time :-).

>>What "type" attribute? site.xml doesn't have one does it?
> Well I found it in the book2menu transformation for menuitems that
> don't show. So it does exist.

Interesting. I've never used it. I think this is legacy stuff, probably 
from the original book.xml file.

Actually, this reminds me of a feature you may not know about. You can 
add a book.xml file into a directory and that will be used instead of 
site.xml. So you can have a menu that will only display when a file in 
that directory is being displayed.

>>Why not a (seemingly) more appropriate attribute name, say show, which
>>can then take the values:
> Wouldn't matter to me, I just wanted to stick with already established
> mechnisms and type is not too bad.

I think we ought to figure out why the type attribute is present before 
we start trying to reuse it for a different purpose. It may cause real 
problems with backward compatability somewhere.

Can anyone tell us what @type is used for?

>>Also, isn't the overhead a little high here? Do we have to define this
>>attribute for all pages that fit into your "don't display unless 
>>selected" category. Or is the intention that we can define it for groups
>>as well:
> Not a bad idea but certainly a second step that requires some more
> modifications. And it would have to be something like
> ShowChildrenOnlyWhenCurrent because you don't actually want to hide
> menus themselves, would you?

Yes, that would be right.

>>If you have a use case and it is an *optional* attribute then I have no
>>objection, I'm just not sure of the attribute name. The enhancements I
>>suggest can come if someone needs them.
> I do and they are completely optional.
> So I'll check these changes into version 0.7x and create a demo in
> freshsite. And unless someone has really strong feelings about the
> naming, I'll stick with the type attribute for now.

Hmmm... that means a new feature in the 0.7 branch, we are only doing 
bug fixes in 0.7 aren't we?


View raw message