httpd-test-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacek Prucia <>
Subject flood: docs -- 2
Date Mon, 23 Sep 2002 16:15:18 GMT

I've been playing with httpd-docs in order to duplicate its look'n'feel
for flood docs. There are some problems with using httpd-docs stuff in
flood, that I would like to share with others.

1. httpd-docs were written as HTML first, then converted to XML. Some
docs are still hand-edited HTML (main index.html in particular). If we
want to be XML-only, sooner or later we'll have to tweak XSL (adding
some missing stuff), which basically means that we need our own XSL

2. httpd-docs XSL is *very* Apache orientated. I mean: logos, indexes,
and things like that. Sure, we can have our own XSL, but then it would
be a pain to sync look'n'feel. After the switch we are basically on our
own with layout.

3. httpd-docs are prepared for successfull httpd installation. Various
language options are sufixed properly (.en, .de, .jp), and served
because MultiViews are turned on in default httpd.conf. I think this
just simply doesn't apply to flood, as it can (or even schould) be
deployed on systems without httpd servers (or other resource consuming
software). Internalization must be done by separate directories.

4. We need a cool 'flood' logo :). I can bug some people to do some
logos, but maybe ASF has a procedure for that (like logo contest or

So how about a different approach for flood docs? Our own
style/layout/logo, plain HTML output (no i18n sufixes), PDF out of the
box (there's no XSL for httpd-docs to make PDF out of XML) and things
like that. It *may* mean, we have to pickup different tool.
Comments/Flames? ;)

Jacek Prucia S.A.

View raw message