forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org>
Subject Re: XInclude
Date Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:35:35 GMT
Carlos Tejo Alonso wrote:

>> For a very long time we have intending to move to a subset of XHTML
>> 2. But planning and doing are two different things. We need someone
>> with a suitably strong need to solve the problems posed by XDoc to
>>  actually do it.
> 
> Maybe, we should start to think to do it. Could somebody show the
> steps to move from xdoc to xhtml? I will try to do my bit.

If it were that simple we would have done it by now ;-)

There have been a number of false starts on this. My own effort was 
aborted because a significant number of people in the community 
disagreed with my approach.

Gav made a start on an XHTML2 plugin (in whiteboard) but that also stalled.

Status is discussed in 
http://markmail.org/message/f4shq54nmqebki5o?q=list:forrest-dev+xhtml2#query:list%3Aforrest-dev

xhtml2+page:1+mid:ttv65i23quvrkzks+state:results

Like any open source project our archives and issue tracker are our 
memory and information pook. Look in JIRA for mentions of XHTML2, in 
particular the following issue identifies the outline steps involved in 
making this move and tracks activity to date (including links into the 
mail arcives):

http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOR-184

You should also conduct a search of the archives to see if there is 
anything missing from those issues (and please add anything you do find).

By reading those (and possibly other) threads you will be able to throw 
your own thoughts into the mix. Of course, we'd be happy to answer 
questions that arise as a result of reading those threads.

>> Why XHTML2? For a full answer see the mail archives but in short it
>> is because it is modular and therefore allows us to strip out all
>> the bits that we don't want. That is all the bits that make it
>> useless as an intermediate language.
> 
> As xhtml2 is still a working draft ... Why not move to xhtml1.1? Is
> it not suitable for the required needs?

No it is not suitable. XHTML1.1 is monolithic. Forrest has to use a 
clean markup so that no style inforamtion is included in the source (or 
intermediate format). We also need clearly structured documents that 
prevent the user from doing something like:

<h1>Heading type 1</h1>

<h3>Heading type 3</h3>

<h2> Heading type 2</h2>

Failure to do this will result in unpredictable behaviour at the output 
stage.

XHTML2 is modular and allows us to select the markup we want to be legal 
and also provides proper structuring of the source.

For more see the archives, e.g. 
http://marc.info/?l=forrest-dev&m=102884176431540&w=2

Ross

Mime
View raw message