httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Abele <>
Subject Re: Stop shipping XML
Date Mon, 30 Dec 2002 21:08:09 GMT
André Malo wrote:
> * Erik Abele wrote:
>>for the online site I think we could use nagoya (has a sufficient JVM AFAIK)
>>to build the docs, and then copy them over to daedalus. but that's only one
> yes. But I recall, that we introduced the different language targets to 
> make sure, that the transformation is correct. So at least one 
> representative of every language would need access rights on nagoya and 
> daedalus.
> (Sorry, don't want to be so destructive, really...)

no problem, IMO such a solution would be too complex to be handy enough for the RM, the committers
and root :-) Perhaps I haven't stated my opinion clearly enough: -1 on this from me too.

>>>However, we could use separate directories for xml and html, like the
>>>httpd-site does. I would support that.
>>this sounds much better to me. Perhaps we should brainstorm some possible
>>solutions for this. I would like to see some layout in the following form:
>>| - build
>>| - docs-html
>>  | - developer
>>  + - other html-only files
> at this point (sorry for mixing discussions):
> We should drop html-only docs. For automation processes it's neccessary to 
> have xml sources for every file.

+1 on dropping them completely, but up to now we have them around ;-(
> For example, I'm currently working on PDF for print using fop (will 
> introduce them today evening or tomorrow, whenever it gets ready). The html 
> files are not parseable by the processor and therefore get no pdf.

Great, I was working on this two months ago but than I ran totally out of time. Do you plan
to generate one big pdf document which contains all the xml sources or several pdf docs?

> I'd like more a source tree and a result tree (xdocs and docs on 
> httpd-site). So all variants of a resource coexist in the same directory. 
> This is much easier to manage and more intuitive, I think.

I think it depends on the viewpoint, but all this should be discussable.

>>| - share
>>  | - images
>>  + - style
>>  or (my favourite, if it wouldn't be too hard):
>>  | - css
>>  | - dtd
>>  | - img
>>  + - xsl
> So the images and css would appear in the result tree while dtds, xsl and 
> other helper files would appear in the source tree.
> Seems all discussable ;-)

yes indeed :) We should wait for some other opinions and then we will see which track to follow,
but all this should have the target to make things easier and more manageable...

> nd

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message