Trevor Harmon wrote:
On Jan 12, 2009, at 9:31 AM, Lukas Theussl wrote:
The information is there but as meta information, it's not content-
information. Eg the maven site has 100s of documents written by
different people at different times, you don't want to see all that
when you browse the site, do you?
I'm not sure what you mean by "all that". There are only three pieces
of information: title, author, and date. I would definitely want to see
these important attributes when reading the documentation about something.
The purpose of adding it is to record some information about the
origin of the document, not to convey information for the end-user.
I disagree about that. Recording the origin and history of the document
is already handled by the source code repository. There's no sense in
duplicating that information in the APT file, unless the goal is to
make it readily visible to the reader... but it's not, hence my confusion.
Looking at this another way... If you just want to include some
"invisible" metadata, you can always insert it into the APT file as a
comment. Any non-comments in the APT file should be visible to the
reader, since that was likely the author's intent.
I don't quite see the point of this discussion anymore... let's just take it as a
definition: the default doxia xhtml sink treats title date and author as meta
information. If you want it to behave differently then write and use your own Sink
(I'll gladly review any patches! :) ). If you want title/date/author to appear on
your site for every single page then include it as content. So everyone can be
made happy...
-Lukas
Trevor
