Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: website++
From: "Theodore W. Leung" <twleung@sauria.com>
To: general@xml.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <3BDE0B26.9EBDB8AE@sun.com>
References: <1004404499.27179.82.camel@dev>  <3BDE0B26.9EBDB8AE@sun.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 29 Oct 2001 20:51:07 -0800
Message-Id: <1004417468.27355.86.camel@dev>
Mime-Version: 1.0

On Mon, 2001-10-29 at 18:06, Edwin Goei wrote:
> "Theodore W. Leung" wrote:
> > 
> > I've done some minimal playing around with the top level website in
> > xml-site, and have modified the styles to get rid of all the images.  A
> > version of the top level site using this style is viewable at
> > http://www.apache.org/~twl/new-site/index.html
> 
> Looks good.  So I'm not sure I understand.  What are you using to
> generate that page?  Cocoon2?
> 
> > If people think that this is a good direction, then I'll keep working to
> > finalize a simple style before tackling docbook.
> 
> Yeah, I think it's a good direction.  As for style, I see these options
> for the source XML schema:
> 
>   + docbook = may be too complicated
>   + simplified docbook = may not be familiar to most
>   + xhtml = familiar to most, but may not be expressive enough
>   + stylebook.dtd = not widely used

At this point, the leading candidate is simplified docbook - but I need
to do some more docbook reading before I can say for sure.  Because some
of the subprojects want to generate printed docs, I think that puts us
into XML land -- as if we weren't already.  So xhtml is out.  Stylebook
is out because we're the only ones who use it.  That leaves some form of
docbook.

> When I had to decide on one of these options a while ago, I chose xhtml
> b/c it was familiar and I though that I could always transform it to
> something else later, but it turns out that there might not be enough
> info in the source to do that w/o hand tweaking the result.
> 
> > 
> > Note:  I am not a photoshop / image wizard, so the image bar at the top
> > still looks ugly.   Suggestions on what to do up there are more than
> > welcome.
> 
> I'm not much of an artist so I can't help here. :-)
> 
> Thanks for taking this on.  I know this has been discussed lots of times
> in the past, but it seems to always get dropped b/c no one actually
> works on it.

If you know any graphics type people that want to help, send them my
way.  Otherwise, we're stuck with ugly.

> -Edwin
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org