On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 13:12 -0400, Pedro I. Sanchez wrote: > On Thu, 2005-02-06 at 15:27 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Pedro I. Sanchez wrote: > > > On Thu, 2005-02-06 at 10:34 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > > > > ... > > > > >>><skinlabels name="pelt"> > > >>> <keyword name="lastPublished" value="???????"/> > > >>> <keyword name="copyright" value="???????"/> > > >>></skinlabels> > > >> > > >>I don't see the value in this. I would imagine that regardless of what > > >>skin you are using you would want the same values to appear in the > > >>output site. > > >> > > > > > > Skins will have different set of labels. "copyright" might be in all of > > > them but "lastPublished" probably not. Hence the need to differentiate > > > by skin name. > > > > True. But what is the advantage of doing it this way over the other > > proposal (define by language). I see a disadvantage, that is it requires > > lots of duplication if we want multiple languages, whereas splitting by > > language only results in the odd unused element for occasional skins/views. > > > You say right, "If we want multiple languages". But in the current > setting of supporting a single language, even if it is not English, then > the skin-based approach could make sense. And as I said before, > uni-lingual web sites are by far more common than multi-lingual ones. > > But I have no problem with the i18n-based approach as long as I can > manually specify the target language. I'm just trying to avoid having to > rely on the i18n framework to get a solution going. > > I don't have the insight into the development effort that this implies > since I am new to Forrest. But certainly, if this would mean a > duplication of work then it is a bad suggestion. > > > Am I missing something about the use case here? > > Not at all. My motivation for the skin-based suggestion is just to make > it available without having to plugin into the i18n stuff which is alien > to me. It just seems to be a small improvement over the current > uni-lingual Forrest code. > > But certainly, if i18n is the way to go, or the "views" thing you > mentioned before, then I'm all for it. I'm just thinking about > possibilities. >
Hola Pedro, I can understand that i18n scares you a bit but I reckon it is the simplest solution. If you are willing to finish my job I will start it for the "old fashion" skins with the setup of sitemap, *one/two* props and you would finish the work. We are talking about 3 -6 stylesheets (3 common/3 pelt) where you need to add <i18n:text>Published</i18n> and then add this key in the message catalog. I do not have enough time to finish that but if you want I add a patch to the issue and you can finish it. salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
