httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Abele <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/docs/manual/style common.dtd
Date Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:58:33 GMT
> * Erik Abele wrote:
>> Okay, you're partially right :-) There is another, not so obvious
>> advantage with this: if we consider direct usage of the XML docs in the
>> future and forget about the ridiculous Mozilla bug, we don't need to
>> distribute the entity and DTD files (.ent/.dtd) later on, since they are
>> referenced with their PUBLIC identifier. We just 'fake' the online
>> references while building the XHTML files so there is no need to fetch
>> these files on every build. This is just for our convenience ;-) The
>> online XML docs are still referenced to the (always up-to-date)
>> resources, as they should IMO.
>> Well, since we're not using the XML docs directly up to now this is not
>> very important, but later on it can save resources...
> *hrm*. At first: currently the transformation process doesn't care about
> the catalog and loads the entities from the w3. (ISDN, not very funny).

This should be okay after correctly updating all the files, as seen in your
last mail...

> The mozilla bug is not really a bug. AFAICS it's intended. mozilla loads
> external documents only from urls that use the chrome: scheme.
> Unfortunately I don't find the url again, where I read this ;-(

To quote you from another mail on the dev@ list: 'A feature that can't be
disabled is a *bug*' (Message-ID:
<n2m-g.19snvq46nezxb$>). Therefore, I consider this
definitely as a bug ;-)

> However. I'm not happy with that solution, since it adds a dependency to
> the process that is (currently) not needed. If we consider sometime not to
> distribute the entity files (that are only required for the transformation
> process), we may simply re-add the stuff, that's now in.
> The .dtds are already referenced absolute and with publicId, so there's no
> problem.

Well, I'm going fine with this; we don't _need_ it now, that's right, but I
just can't see how 8 (?) lines complicate the build process so much and IMO
'foreign' resources should be referenced to their original source instead of
referencing them with local copies, but that's more a personal thing...

However, another more important concern is Ants memory usage. After playing
with some entities I realized strong problems: just randomly touch some
files in the manual dir and add some entities (e.g. &copy;) to some of them.
Then build. I'm always getting OutOfMemory failures and can only build the
whole tree after calling several times. I don't know if it's
machine-dependent (I can currently build only on redhat8.0, P4/128MB, will
test it later with 1GB RAM on freebsd) but I would like to hear some other
experiences with this. Perhaps the conclusion is, that we have to back out
the whole entity-thing :-(

Well, I've no problem with using &#160; :-) Thoughts???

> I think further, that the build process is our own. It references to some
> of our own dtds, that use "our own" entities (currently not really, I know,
> but it's the same argument, what happens in future?)
> hmm. Other opinions?

would be nice to hear some :-)


> nd
> -- 
> print "Just Another Perl Hacker";
> # André Malo, <> #
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message