(Fwd) Re: [POLL] Full vs. truncated menus

[Ed Steenhoek <ed...@pi.net>]

Oops, should have send the mail below to the group in stead of 
Jeff...

Apologies !

------- Forwarded message follows -------
From:           	Ed Steenhoek <ed...@pi.net>
To:             	Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>
Subject:        	Re: [POLL] Full vs. truncated menus
Send reply to:  	edstnhk@pi.nl
Date sent:      	Sun, 09 Feb 2003 19:25:18 +0100

On 7 Feb 2003 at 18:58, Jeff Turner wrote:

> ....
[X] The menu should be limited to files below the current directory [
] The menu should display all files in the site > .... > --Jeff

On top of this I take the gamble as a newbie to add another item into
the discussion: if menu's are truncated then shouldn't tabs.xml be
integrated into site.xml?

If tabs.xml is needed somewhere during the generation process it
should be able to generate it out of site.xml. Doing so will reduce
the number of places where navigation information is maintained.

Ed




------- End of forwarded message -------

Re: (Fwd) Re: [POLL] Full vs. truncated menus

[Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>]

On Sun, Feb 09, 2003 at 09:25:05PM +0100, Ed Steenhoek wrote:
> Oops, should have send the mail below to the group in stead of 
> Jeff...

Oops, I should have replied to the list!

> Apologies !
> 
> ------- Forwarded message follows -------
> From:           	Ed Steenhoek <ed...@pi.net>
> To:             	Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>
> Subject:        	Re: [POLL] Full vs. truncated menus
> Send reply to:  	edstnhk@pi.nl
> Date sent:      	Sun, 09 Feb 2003 19:25:18 +0100
> 
> On 7 Feb 2003 at 18:58, Jeff Turner wrote:
> 
> > ....
> [X] The menu should be limited to files below the current directory [
> ] The menu should display all files in the site > .... > --Jeff
> 
> On top of this I take the gamble as a newbie to add another item into
> the discussion: if menu's are truncated then shouldn't tabs.xml be
> integrated into site.xml?
> 
> If tabs.xml is needed somewhere during the generation process it
> should be able to generate it out of site.xml. Doing so will reduce
> the number of places where navigation information is maintained.


You're right, tabs could to be merged into site.xml in the future.  I
have this niggling feeling though, that site.xml is mixing concerns:

1) Raw data, that could be generated directly from the filesystem
   (directory structure, label and href, ie 90% of site.xml)
2) Classification of pages. Eg <about label="About"> around a block of
   entries.  This is semantics, not structure, so probably ought to be
   separate.
3) Then again, we need to create 'views' of site.xml for each page.
   Currently the 'view' is hardcoded: everything (0.3) or
   everything-below-current (0.3.1).  Would be nice to make this more
   fine-grained.

So there's lots that should happen with site.xml.  I think tabs fit into
3), a view of the data.  Or perhaps 2).  Anyway, I'm a bit reluctant to
throw anything more into site.xml until 1) is automated, and the
relationships become clearer.

--Jeff

> 
> Ed