You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@forrest.apache.org by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au> on 2002/11/03 02:30:24 UTC
Re: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Jeff Turner wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > > I have noticed that Forrest is described inconsistently
> > > in various documents. So i have gathered together the
> > > descriptions to start refinement. I think that we need a
> > > longish description (refine what we have at A) and
> > > also develop a one-liner.
> >
> > Excellent idea. It's the first thing users see, sent out
> > with every project announcement.. well worth polishing.
> <snip/>
> > > > A) xml-forrest/src/documentation/content/xdocs/index.xml
> > > > Forrest provides a robust technological infrastructure for
> > > > open software development for the Apache Software Foundation
> > > > based on ASF software, ASF practices and experience, and
> > > > modern software design principles.
> > >
> > > Having read that, is a potential user _any_ closer to knowing
> > > what Forrest actually is? To me it seems almost meaningless.
> > > "robust
> > > technical infrastructure".. an operating system perhaps? :)
> > >
> > > How about:
> > >
> > > "Forrest is an XML-oriented project documentation system based on
> > > Apache Cocoon. It contains XML schemas (DTDs), XSLT stylesheets,
> > > images and other resources used to render a project's XML source
> > > files into a website."
> >
> > Better. Here is my version.
> >
> > "Forrest is an XML-oriented project documentation framework
> > based on Apache Cocoon, providing XSLT stylesheets and schema,
> > images and other resources. Forrest uses these to render the
> > XML source content into a website via command-line, robot, or
> > a dynamic web application."
>
> Better still :)
>
> Perhaps "XML standards-oriented" instead of "XML-oriented"? It hints
> that we prefer standard ways of doing things: XSLT over Velocity etc,
> which is a nice selling point.
>
> Would be nice to somehow convey that Forrest scales from static to
> dynamic sites. Ie, start out with a small static site, then when you
> find you need user login, feedback modules or RSS feeds, switch
> painlessly to a live webapp. I don't know of anything else that offers
> this possibility.
Here is the current draft:
"Forrest is an XML standards-oriented project documentation
framework based on Apache Cocoon, providing XSLT stylesheets
and schema, images and other resources. Forrest uses these to
render the XML source content into a website via command-line,
robot, or a dynamic web application. Start with a small static
site and grow to a dynamic application."
Issues:
1) Is it getting too long?
2) "schema" is a singular word, "schemata" is the proper plural,
but it sounds like a disease or a religious affliction. Is there
a better term? I am trying to avoid specific terms like DTD,
WXS, or XML Schema (when they mean W3C XML Schema). One other
choice is "grammar".
3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
--David
Re: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
Jeff Turner wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > David Crossley wrote:
> > <snip/>
> > >
> > > Here is the current draft:
> > > "Forrest is an XML standards-oriented project documentation
> > > framework based on Apache Cocoon, providing XSLT stylesheets
> > > and schema, images and other resources. Forrest uses these to
> > > render the XML source content into a website via command-line,
> > > robot, or a dynamic web application. Start with a small static
> > > site and grow to a dynamic application."
> > >
> > > Issues:
> > > 1) Is it getting too long?
>
> Maybe we should drop the last line.. it really needs a separate
> paragraph.
Yes, i wondered about that too. I agree, i will add that into the
second paragraph.
> > > 2) "schema" is a singular word, "schemata" is the proper plural,
> > > but it sounds like a disease or a religious affliction. Is there
> > > a better term? I am trying to avoid specific terms like DTD,
> > > WXS, or XML Schema (when they mean W3C XML Schema). One other
> > > choice is "grammar".
> >
> > This is still an outstanding issue. Any suggestions?
>
> schemas?
>
> There was a massive XML-DEV thread about schemas vs schemata.
> I can't remember which side won.
If anyone is interested then Google found it. This link
will dump you in the middle of two threads on the topic.
http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200106/threads.html#01024
I tried, but emerged as a blithering wreck.
> > > 3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
> > > Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
> >
> > Peter Donald wrote:
> > > Or maybe even more raw
> > >
> > > "Flexible, standards-based, site development tool."
> >
> > > In time it would be nice to add in "Easy-to-use" :)
> >
> > With a little cooking ...
> > "Standards-based site documentation framework"
>
> +1
>
> --Jeff
>
> > > Robert Koberg wrote:
> > > > wait, too many words :) it just needs:
> > > >
> > > > Standards based site development that provides the
> > > > building blocks to allow growth in any direction.
Re: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 06:36:42PM +1100, David Crossley wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> <snip/>
> >
> > Here is the current draft:
> > "Forrest is an XML standards-oriented project documentation
> > framework based on Apache Cocoon, providing XSLT stylesheets
> > and schema, images and other resources. Forrest uses these to
> > render the XML source content into a website via command-line,
> > robot, or a dynamic web application. Start with a small static
> > site and grow to a dynamic application."
> >
> > Issues:
> > 1) Is it getting too long?
Maybe we should drop the last line.. it really needs a separate
paragraph.
> > 2) "schema" is a singular word, "schemata" is the proper plural,
> > but it sounds like a disease or a religious affliction. Is there
> > a better term? I am trying to avoid specific terms like DTD,
> > WXS, or XML Schema (when they mean W3C XML Schema). One other
> > choice is "grammar".
>
> This is still an outstanding issue. Any suggestions?
schemas?
There was a massive XML-DEV thread about schemas vs schemata.. I can't
remember which side won.
> > 3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
> > Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
>
> Peter Donald wrote:
> > Or maybe even more raw
> >
> > "Flexible, standards-based, site development tool."
>
> > In time it would be nice to add in "Easy-to-use" :)
>
> With a little cooking ...
> "Standards-based site documentation framework"
+1
--Jeff
> > Robert Koberg wrote:
> > > wait, too many words :) it just needs:
> > >
> > > Standards based site development that provides the
> > > building blocks to allow growth in any direction.
>
>
>
Re: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
David Crossley wrote:
<snip/>
>
> Here is the current draft:
> "Forrest is an XML standards-oriented project documentation
> framework based on Apache Cocoon, providing XSLT stylesheets
> and schema, images and other resources. Forrest uses these to
> render the XML source content into a website via command-line,
> robot, or a dynamic web application. Start with a small static
> site and grow to a dynamic application."
>
> Issues:
> 1) Is it getting too long?
>
> 2) "schema" is a singular word, "schemata" is the proper plural,
> but it sounds like a disease or a religious affliction. Is there
> a better term? I am trying to avoid specific terms like DTD,
> WXS, or XML Schema (when they mean W3C XML Schema). One other
> choice is "grammar".
This is still an outstanding issue. Any suggestions?
> 3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
> Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
Peter Donald wrote:
> Or maybe even more raw
>
> "Flexible, standards-based, site development tool."
> In time it would be nice to add in "Easy-to-use" :)
With a little cooking ...
"Standards-based site documentation framework"
> Robert Koberg wrote:
> > wait, too many words :) it just needs:
> >
> > Standards based site development that provides the
> > building blocks to allow growth in any direction.
RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
Hi Bert,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bert Van Kets [mailto:bert@vankets.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:41 AM
> To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
>
>
> At 03:08 3/11/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Knowing that one of the goals of the forrest project is to create standards
> >based sites, I wanted to check if
> >http://xml.apache.org/forrest/ is valid according to the standards
> >initiatives.
> >
> >It fails on validating to HTML 4.01 transitional. Check at:
> >http://validator.w3.org/
> >
> >It fails U.S. Section 508 Guidelines:
> >http://bobby.watchfire.com/
> >(I don't know what you have to do to get 'Web Content Accessibility
> Guidelines
> >1.0' valid - koberg.com doesn't even validate to this...)
> >
> >And it fails on CSS:
> >http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html
> >
> >I would suggest that rather than focus on fixing current styling
> (though it is
> >not far from being valid), that effort is put toward developing a tableless
> >layout.
>
> Rob,
> I have some time coming up to get cracking on this. Can you give some
> suggestions on haw to create a NS4.x compatible tableless layout.
> IMHO NS4.x does not allow this as it does not interprete the DIV and SPAN
> tags correctly (for starters).
I just looked at our new site in Nav4.7. I think it is OK for Nav4 users (except
our logo is white on a white backgrouund...).
Checkout http://www.livestoryboard.com
It looks similar in lynx.
Should we cater to the (less than) 1% of Nav users or the 10-20% of visually
impaired users?
If you all want, we can use the livestoryboard.com site as a base for a forrest
skin. We have put ALOT of work into the layout/css. The site can look extremely
different by simply changing the CSS.
best,
-Rob
>
> Bert
>
>
> >best,
> >-Rob
RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Bert Van Kets <be...@vankets.com>.
At 03:08 3/11/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Knowing that one of the goals of the forrest project is to create standards
>based sites, I wanted to check if
>http://xml.apache.org/forrest/ is valid according to the standards
>initiatives.
>
>It fails on validating to HTML 4.01 transitional. Check at:
>http://validator.w3.org/
>
>It fails U.S. Section 508 Guidelines:
>http://bobby.watchfire.com/
>(I don't know what you have to do to get 'Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
>1.0' valid - koberg.com doesn't even validate to this...)
>
>And it fails on CSS:
>http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html
>
>I would suggest that rather than focus on fixing current styling (though it is
>not far from being valid), that effort is put toward developing a tableless
>layout.
Rob,
I have some time coming up to get cracking on this. Can you give some
suggestions on haw to create a NS4.x compatible tableless layout.
IMHO NS4.x does not allow this as it does not interprete the DIV and SPAN
tags correctly (for starters).
Bert
>best,
>-Rob
Standards compliance (Was: sync various descriptions of Forrest)
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
Robert Koberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Knowing that one of the goals of the forrest project is to create standards
> based sites, I wanted to check if
> http://xml.apache.org/forrest/ is valid according to the standards initiatives.
Excellent work Robert. This is extremely important.
> It fails on validating to HTML 4.01 transitional. Check at:
> http://validator.w3.org/
>
> It fails U.S. Section 508 Guidelines:
> http://bobby.watchfire.com/
> (I don't know what you have to do to get 'Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
> 1.0' valid - koberg.com doesn't even validate to this...)
>
> And it fails on CSS:
> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html
>
> I would suggest that rather than focus on fixing current styling
> (though it is not far from being valid), that effort is put
> toward developing a tableless layout.
I would like to see both happening. Tweak the current
stuff to get as close as possible, and perhaps uncover
some issues in the process. Simultaneously work on a
tableless layout. This would be just another skin, and
perhaps its own sitemap. Please provide patches and we
will get started with both jobs.
There is a new document in Forrest: compliance.xml
This has the URLs and info that Robert has initiated.
There are also some dot points, where i have listed
some important issues from each. Please add more.
--David
RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
Hi,
Knowing that one of the goals of the forrest project is to create standards
based sites, I wanted to check if
http://xml.apache.org/forrest/ is valid according to the standards initiatives.
It fails on validating to HTML 4.01 transitional. Check at:
http://validator.w3.org/
It fails U.S. Section 508 Guidelines:
http://bobby.watchfire.com/
(I don't know what you have to do to get 'Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
1.0' valid - koberg.com doesn't even validate to this...)
And it fails on CSS:
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html
I would suggest that rather than focus on fixing current styling (though it is
not far from being valid), that effort is put toward developing a tableless
layout.
best,
-Rob
Re: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>.
Or maybe even more raw
"Flexible, standards-based, site development tool."
In time it would be nice to add in "Easy-to-use" :)
On Sun, 3 Nov 2002 13:03, Robert Koberg wrote:
> wait, too many words :) it just needs:
>
> Standards based site development that provides the building blocks to allow
> growth in any direction.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 5:49 PM
> > To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]
> > >
> > >
> > > 3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
> > > Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
> >
> > How about something like:
> >
> > Standards based site development that provides the building blocks to
> > allow growth in any direction you want.
> >
> > best,
> > -Rob
> >
> > > --David
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*-----------------------------------------------------*
* "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, *
* and proving that there is no need to do so - almost *
* everyone gets busy on the proof." *
* - John Kenneth Galbraith *
*-----------------------------------------------------*
RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
wait, too many words :) it just needs:
Standards based site development that provides the building blocks to allow
growth in any direction.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 5:49 PM
> To: forrest-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
>
>
> Hi,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]
>
> >
> > 3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
> > Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
>
> How about something like:
>
> Standards based site development that provides the building blocks to allow
> growth in any direction you want.
>
> best,
> -Rob
>
>
> >
> > --David
> >
> >
>
>
RE: sync various descriptions of Forrest
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]
>
> 3) We still need a one-liner too. This is needed for
> Bugzilla and will be useful elsewhere.
How about something like:
Standards based site development that provides the building blocks to allow
growth in any direction you want.
best,
-Rob
>
> --David
>
>