You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org> on 2003/02/19 14:39:56 UTC

Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

"Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:

> So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki.  It seems the
> best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> system would cause.

I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
"Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).

Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
web folders and get done with it...

    Pier


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal

Please let's not jump to conclusions ;-)

</Steven>
-- 
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at            http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org                stevenn at apache.org


Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal

Please let's not jump to conclusions ;-)

</Steven>
-- 
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at            http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org                stevenn at apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Diana Shannon <sh...@apache.org>.
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:05  PM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> I have introduced ihtml and cwiki for the sole reason to make doc 
> editing much easier. Imagine that our doccers use Webdav on Subversion 
> to commit doc changes, in html or wiki format. Plain easy, and 
> subversion gives us revisions.

I need time to check this approach out in greater detail over the 
weekend. I'll report back with impressions.

Thanks to everyone for the great input on this thread!

Diana


Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Jeff Turner wrote, On 19/02/2003 15.49:
...
> So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
> as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2

Then why not use html (ihtml), there are loads of editors.

I have introduced ihtml and cwiki for the sole reason to make doc 
editing much easier. Imagine that our doccers use Webdav on Subversion 
to commit doc changes, in html or wiki format. Plain easy, and 
subversion gives us revisions.

Add to that SSL so we don't need to give unix accounts to everyone that 
collaborates on our CVS, and that the wiki files can be edited by anyone 
using subwiki, and you have a *usable* the poor man's CMS.

Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal, but in the meantime 
this could be a step in that direction.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Jeff Turner wrote, On 19/02/2003 15.49:
...
> So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
> as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:
> 
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2

Then why not use html (ihtml), there are loads of editors.

I have introduced ihtml and cwiki for the sole reason to make doc 
editing much easier. Imagine that our doccers use Webdav on Subversion 
to commit doc changes, in html or wiki format. Plain easy, and 
subversion gives us revisions.

Add to that SSL so we don't need to give unix accounts to everyone that 
collaborates on our CVS, and that the wiki files can be edited by anyone 
using subwiki, and you have a *usable* the poor man's CMS.

Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal, but in the meantime 
this could be a step in that direction.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 01:39:56PM +0000, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> "Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki.  It seems the
> > best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> > system would cause.
> 
> I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
> contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
> that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
> "Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).

In doc-v11 we'd have to abuse <code> to do that.  The XML format is so
limited that this kind of abuse becomes necessary.  We could add
<screenshot> and <configuration> tags, but where does the tag-adding
process end?

Its sad, but right now, CSS-happy XHTML is often more semantically rich
than doc-v11 XML documentation.  We could use:

<div style="configuration">
</div>

Which is a DTD-friendly equivalent of <configuration>.

So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2

--Jeff

> Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
> web folders and get done with it...
> 
>     Pier
> 

Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)

Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 01:39:56PM +0000, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> "Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki.  It seems the
> > best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> > system would cause.
> 
> I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
> contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
> that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
> "Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).

In doc-v11 we'd have to abuse <code> to do that.  The XML format is so
limited that this kind of abuse becomes necessary.  We could add
<screenshot> and <configuration> tags, but where does the tag-adding
process end?

Its sad, but right now, CSS-happy XHTML is often more semantically rich
than doc-v11 XML documentation.  We could use:

<div style="configuration">
</div>

Which is a DTD-friendly equivalent of <configuration>.

So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2

--Jeff

> Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
> web folders and get done with it...
> 
>     Pier
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org