httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: CHM files 2.0.46
Date Fri, 23 May 2003 17:46:57 GMT
At 06:56 AM 5/23/2003, Eric wrote:

>To summarize the POV:
>
>a) we ship the HTML documentation together with releases (as we do today)

+1

>b) additional documentation formats (CHM, PDF, etc.) are generated and
>   published independently from releases and don't come with the actual
>   distribution

+1.  A pointer in httpd-2.0/README might be sweet.

>c) the additional documentation formats are only available for the most
>   recent version (per branch?)

Sounds OK.

>If I got this correctly, then I'm +1 :-)
>
>> By the way, what do you think about localized HTML offline packages?
>> (httpd-docs-x.y.z.$lang.tar.gz)? Creation is probably trivial, because we
>> can adapt concepts/code from the chm creation stuff and build it easily with
>> ant. Would such packages be useful in any way?
>
>Hmmm, I think Michaels point is a very valid one. I'd like to have localized
>HTML packages too, but up to now I've no idea how to handle this
>successfully. I know PHP is doing the same, but it's always irritating when
>you open up the German PDF/CHM version (don't know if they have HTML
>packages too) and some big parts are in English :-(

Yes - that's a benefit of the negotiated html - If I'm a Dutch/German/English
speaker (with proficiency in that order) - I would really rather read German
pages rather than English if a Dutch translation doesn't exist.

It would be more difficult given n->m->english compiled docs - so it's probably
not worth that much effort.  Remember if they don't like the missing pages,
they can always join us and provide a translation of the offending doc :-)

>>> 2. We don't want to give the impression that if you want docs, you need to
>>> download them separately.
>> 
>> Good point. That's true.
>
>Oh, yes please.

I was really strongly tempted to suggest we roll in the .chm file into our next
Apache/Win32 releases.  It would be a great match.  That is, until folks started
pointing out the language issue, and I considered that the installer wouldn't
waste the bandwidth packaging every .chm flavor we eventually generate.

If I could work it out as a canonical URI directly from the web (with some
non-fatal reaction if the user isn't online) then that would be worth doing.
Unfortunately with .msi installer packages, that's less than trivial.

Bill



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message