wiadomosc od Justin Erenkrantz, z dnia Wed, Sep 25, 2002 at 04:29:34PM -0700
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 06:15:18PM +0200, Jacek Prucia wrote:
> > 1. httpd-docs were written as HTML first, then converted to XML. Some
> > docs are still hand-edited HTML (main index.html in particular). If we
> > want to be XML-only, sooner or later we'll have to tweak XSL (adding
> > some missing stuff), which basically means that we need our own XSL
> > copy.
>
> Yeah, I think we can just add a flood.{sh|xsl|xml} file to
> site-tools/httpd-docs-build and be done with it. Hopefully, most
> of the flood-specific changes can be isolated to there. That should
> be able to have the path to our .xsl file.
Uhm. I'll see what docs guys think about it, but it looks like a nice solution.
Maybe we can have true common.xsl (that is -- common across all httpd
subprojects docs).
> > 2. httpd-docs XSL is *very* Apache orientated. I mean: logos, indexes,
> > and things like that. Sure, we can have our own XSL, but then it would
> > be a pain to sync look'n'feel. After the switch we are basically on our
> > own with layout.
>
> True, but not a big deal, IMHO. I think it can be 'inspired' by
> the look-and-feel of the new docs, but it doesn't have to be.
Yep, but since we don't have a true common.xsl, then when somebody makes new
layout, we have to switch manually. I'll try to make a true common.xsl, and
supply docs guys a patch. That would solve our problem.
> > 3. httpd-docs are prepared for successfull httpd installation. Various
> > language options are sufixed properly (.en, .de, .jp), and served
> > because MultiViews are turned on in default httpd.conf. I think this
> > just simply doesn't apply to flood, as it can (or even schould) be
> > deployed on systems without httpd servers (or other resource consuming
> > software). Internalization must be done by separate directories.
>
> Nah, I think keeping the .en, .de, .jp model is fine. We don't want
> to make it complicated if someone adds translations of different
> languages. I think we can make it so that the '.en' isn't suffixed
> to English docs, so that might make it a bit easier for people who
> don't place it behind an Apache HTTP Server. But, I believe separate
> directories are a bad idea.
Hmm... maybe a bunch of ant targets will help. Something like './flood.sh de',
which would use target 'doc-de', and build deutsch docs only. No arg? We're
building en by default. Does that makes sense?
> > 4. We need a cool 'flood' logo :). I can bug some people to do some
> > logos, but maybe ASF has a procedure for that (like logo contest or
> > somesuch).
>
> However we want to do it. If you want to run a logo contest, that'd
> be goodness. =)
I'll see what I can do :)
> > So how about a different approach for flood docs? Our own
> > style/layout/logo, plain HTML output (no i18n sufixes), PDF out of the
> > box (there's no XSL for httpd-docs to make PDF out of XML) and things
> > like that. It *may* mean, we have to pickup different tool.
> > Comments/Flames? ;)
>
> I'd prefer using the XML-style and trying to leverage what the
> httpd-docs guys have done in the way of the build system.
Yeah, but that requires flood + httpd-docs coop.
regards,
--
Jacek Prucia
7bulls.com S.A.
