Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact apache-docs-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list apache-docs@apache.org Received: (qmail 14057 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 18:19:38 -0000 Received: from orange.csi.cam.ac.uk (exim@131.111.8.77) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 18:19:38 -0000 Received: from dax.joh.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.237.83] ident=somebody) by orange.csi.cam.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 141BpQ-0002lA-00 for apache-docs@apache.org; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:19:36 +0000 From: James A Sutherland To: apache-docs@apache.org Subject: Re: Converting docs to XHTML (was Re: HTML3.2 -> HTML4.0) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 18:17:20 +0000 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28] Content-Type: text/plain References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00112918200000.10869@dax.joh.cam.ac.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, you wrote: > On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, James A Sutherland wrote: > > OK. Since I made a start on this a while ago, I'll volunteer to make a start - > > I don't have commit access, though, so who wants to handle the patches? Or can > > I get commit access on docs? Just lowercasing the tags will generate a huge > > flood of trivial but enormous patches; e-mailling them to apache-docs would > > probably put a price on my head :-) > > > > > It is a significant enough change, that I would probably run it by > > > new-httpd before making any decisions. We need to make sure that it would > > > not pose a barrier to any of the developers when it comes to documenting > > > their work. > > > > Agreed; do you want to propose it, or shall I? (If any developers do have > > problems with XHTML, I would be willing to XHTMLify their docs; I doubt this > > will be an issue for many of them, though.) > > > > Okay, here is a suggested course of action: > > 1. I will give a "heads-up" to the new-httpd list later today > on the XHTML issue to make sure nobody there objects. > > 2. We wait about two days to make sure eveyone has a chance to > read this thread and voice their opinion on conversion to XHTML. > > 3. In that time, we settle the issue of what the header and footer SSI > should look like, what it will be called, and how it will be included in > the files and in the distribution. I think it is time for specific > proposals on this issue, and turn down the bickering a little. It seems > logical that this be done at the same time as the XHTML conversion. Committing the new header file is the first step in the XHTML conversion; all the XHTML pages will then reference this file. > 4. Assuming no objections, and the SSI issue being settled, > you take one file and convert it and post it. > > 5. Assuming no objections to this, do the same thing for > an entire directory. You can tar it up and put it on a website, > or just email it directly to me and I can commit it. (Or if > you get commit access by this point, you can do it yourself.) > > Is this a good plan? Yes, that's fine with me. Hopefully Rich will be able to help once we make a start, assuming no objections. James.