On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 15:56, Victor Mote wrote: > Questions: > 1. Are these things that need to be done in FOP or that need to be done in > Forrest?
Forrest. The dtd validation is important since it makes it a lot easier to know if the xml docs are correct. I figured out the dtd, always helps to read the docs... I'm not sure if there is an option to give background colours, need to ask the forrest people. > 2. I'll be glad to do whatever work is required to get it working properly, > but (if it is a Forrest issue) am not sure whether it is more efficient for > you and Joerg handle it, or whether I should get more up-to-speed on > Forrest. I guess the question is whether we should treat this as a > "specialty" or whether anyone who wants to work on doc needs to become a > semi-expert on Forrest. Or, perhaps there is a half-way ground that can be > documented that shows the basics. I have spent quite a bit of time on the > Forrest site, but have (so far) resisted the urge to dive deeply into it. At the moment it is in a bit of flux. Eventually I think someone writing documents shouldn't need to know much more than the document structure and only need a bit of knowledge if doing some extra stylesheets etc. I think time would be better spent at the moment updating the content. Eventually forrest should be easy and not something that you really need to understand in depth. > Comments: > 1. Since we don't have a way to manage multiple versions of this document, > everybody needs to be aware that it applies right now to the released code > (0.20.4), and should not be modified based on changes to the trunk. Also, > since (as I understand it), it is not "frozen" for that release, we should > not even change it for updates on the maintenance branch. It should only be > changed to fix inaccuracies as it relates to 0.20.4, until 0.20.5 is > released. It is my opinion that we really need some of these documents in > three places on our web site right now (latest release, nightly cvs > maintenance build, and nightly cvs trunk build), but until the mechanics / > philosophies get worked out on that, we just need to be careful to remember > what the one version applies to. Yes, I think for now we should stick with the main tab as current release. > 2. If we decide to get the PDF version of our doc working again (bug 13325), > I owe you an XSL-FO stylesheet for this document as well that can be used > there. Some other people have mentioned this would be a good thing. Not sure what the mechanics of it would be but maybe it is possible to use the tabs.xml and book.xml files to get the source files then get all the content together and make one big document. If you have an idea then go for it! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
