Le Samedi, 11 oct 2003, à 14:25 Europe/Zurich, Nicola Ken Barozzi a écrit :
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:...We can then build all kinds of navigational structures, trails, multiple tables of contents, beginners/advanced, whatever (again picking up on wiki idea of a flat page structure with many navigation paths), but the path to a given document stays valid forever unless documents are removed.
Forrest's site.xml is ready to adapt to the needs.
ok. I'd prefer multiple "navigation definition" files though, one for each "navigation concern" (tracks, beginner/advanced, functionality-based, etc).
Is this possible with Forrest, or what do you suggest?
..Eh, why "Forrest /probably/ "?
Only because I haven't been following it lately and don't know much details about where it is and where it is going.
Nothing against Forrest!
...
-if the docs format changes for the new doc management system, navigation definitions stay valid.
There was a discussion on Forrest about making all links be done to files without extensions, and now we use site.xml to reference these links.
The only thing that is still lacking is making the output remain "static" over time.
Not sure if I understand this, can you explain?
...What I wanted to do is to have Forrest generate an index of pages and the users add this to CVS. With this index we have all the doc history, and Forrest can generate redirects if urls change. I also want want to generate redirects for filenames without urls and add an unique id to every page in the index, so that Forrest can add barcodes to the pages.
Sounds good.
...Please don't forget Forrest.
Certainly not!
-Bertrand
