You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lenya.apache.org by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org> on 2007/04/25 11:29:09 UTC
Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42230] - define contract for images and assets
in backend store, move to XHTML2 strict.
Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb:
> bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
>> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
>> RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
>> <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230>.
>> ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
>> INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
>>
>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230
>>
>>
>> nettings@apache.org changed:
>>
>> What |Removed |Added
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Target Milestone|1.4 |1.4.1
>
> obviously, the move to XHTML2 is something for lenya 2.0,
Isn't it just another resource type?
> but it does not exist as a target milestone yet...
Gregor, would you mind adding the milestone? TIA!
-- Andreas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42230] - define contract for images and assets
in backend store, move to XHTML2 strict.
Posted by Andreas Hartmann <an...@apache.org>.
Joern, maybe we should add these comments to the bug report?
-- Andreas
Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb:
> Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>> Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb:
>>> bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
>>>> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
>>>> RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
>>>> <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230>.
>>>> ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
>>>> INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
>>>>
>>>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> nettings@apache.org changed:
>>>>
>>>> What |Removed |Added
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Target Milestone|1.4 |1.4.1
>>> obviously, the move to XHTML2 is something for lenya 2.0,
>>
>> Isn't it just another resource type?
>
> true. what i'm after is a really well-defined, really picky backend
> format that everybody could rely on, especially the editor maintainers.
> currently we don't have a clear notion of what's stored in a document.
> we have doctype-based validation, but there are editor hacks in there.
> editors in turn have validation hacks in them, and the result is not so
> nice.
>
> the reason why i consider it 2.0 stuff is that we would have to throw
> away the old xhtml doctype, to get rid of all those hacks in the editors
> and to have a decent editor abstraction layer at last.
>
> like so:
>
> XHTML2 with metadata and lenya-specific link and image elements (uuid
> based, supporting on-the-fly resizing etc..)
> |
> V
> generic pre-processing: replace link and image tags.
> |
> V
> editor-specific pre-processing: hack the living shit out of the xhtml2
> format, to cater to every conceivable editor quirk
> |
> V
> edit -> editor-specific glue -> truly generic asset,
> + submit link and image dialogues
> |
> V
> editor-specific post-processing
> |
> V
> generic post-processing
> |
> V
> validate [1]
> |
> V
> store
>
> [1] the problem with validation (at least in tinymce) is that currently
> users lose data when validation errors occur: the validator barfs, the
> editor is re-displayed, but the document can't be saved again for
> locking reasons.
> plus the validation errors need not correspond to what the user actually
> enters, due to post-processing. so we would need to provide a
> step-by-step overview of the post-processing pipeline similar to what
> the profiler does, to help the user figure out the real problem.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org
Re: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 42230] - define contract for images and assets
in backend store, move to XHTML2 strict.
Posted by Joern Nettingsmeier <ne...@folkwang-hochschule.de>.
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb:
>> bugzilla@apache.org wrote:
>>> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
>>> RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
>>> <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230>.
>>> ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
>>> INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
>>>
>>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230
>>>
>>>
>>> nettings@apache.org changed:
>>>
>>> What |Removed |Added
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Target Milestone|1.4 |1.4.1
>> obviously, the move to XHTML2 is something for lenya 2.0,
>
> Isn't it just another resource type?
true. what i'm after is a really well-defined, really picky backend
format that everybody could rely on, especially the editor maintainers.
currently we don't have a clear notion of what's stored in a document.
we have doctype-based validation, but there are editor hacks in there.
editors in turn have validation hacks in them, and the result is not so
nice.
the reason why i consider it 2.0 stuff is that we would have to throw
away the old xhtml doctype, to get rid of all those hacks in the editors
and to have a decent editor abstraction layer at last.
like so:
XHTML2 with metadata and lenya-specific link and image elements (uuid
based, supporting on-the-fly resizing etc..)
|
V
generic pre-processing: replace link and image tags.
|
V
editor-specific pre-processing: hack the living shit out of the xhtml2
format, to cater to every conceivable editor quirk
|
V
edit -> editor-specific glue -> truly generic asset,
+ submit link and image dialogues
|
V
editor-specific post-processing
|
V
generic post-processing
|
V
validate [1]
|
V
store
[1] the problem with validation (at least in tinymce) is that currently
users lose data when validation errors occur: the validator barfs, the
editor is re-displayed, but the document can't be saved again for
locking reasons.
plus the validation errors need not correspond to what the user actually
enters, due to post-processing. so we would need to provide a
step-by-step overview of the post-processing pipeline similar to what
the profiler does, to help the user figure out the real problem.
--
jörn nettingsmeier
home://germany/45128 essen/lortzingstr. 11/
http://spunk.dnsalias.org
phone://+49/201/491621
Kurt is up in Heaven now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org