>>>> Does that mean that we would be eventually phasing out Forrest >>>> altogether and store the documentation directly in the CMS? >>> >>> Yes. We hope to phase out Forrest... All content changes will occur in the >>> CMS. >>> >> >> At present, my understanding is that the forrest content is also converted >> to PDF by translating to XML, then running through FOP. Is this correct? >> >> What will happen if we switch to MD markup, which is considerably less >> semantically rich than forrest? Will it still be possible to create the >> same PDF docs?
>> If not, then that seems like a fairly radical change to the current >> approach, at least for FOP documentation. > A change that I personally welcome. Quite frankly the PDF versions of > our web pages look terrible and don’t do honour to FOP. And I’ve never > been comfortable enough with Forrest to change the way they look. And > I must say, I don’t have the energy to learn enough of Forrest to be > able to do it. > > I’m happy with the all-CMS and Markdown approach, especially if it can > give our website a 21st century look. > > Vincent Agreed. This will make it easier to update the site but we won't eat our dog food, which is a bummer. Perhaps someone can add PDF output to the CMS? GSOC? It's definitely a topic for discussion. Clay
