You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@httpd.apache.org by kajaa <ka...@eastday.com> on 2003/07/11 11:32:07 UTC
Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Hi,
We know that, the recent manual docs are now negotiated via type-map,
instead of MultiView as before. Having met the following problems, I doubt,
are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for the manual docs?
1. there are more files in the docs tree to manage;
2. for every new translated xml, say bind.xml.zh-cn, bind.html must be
modified;
3. administrator who is providing the manual docs on his website must adjust
server config.
kajaa
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Posted by Ilia Soldis <so...@infolio.ru>.
> > 1. there are more files in the docs tree to manage;
> > 2. for every new translated xml, say bind.xml.zh-cn, bind.html must be
> > modified;
>
> The files are automatically maintained with build metafiles :-)
You said that files are automatically maintained with build metafiles. But
when I add "ru" to a metafile, that run build.sh ru - it doesn't add
automatically those three type-map lines in html file...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* kajaa wrote:
> I've got it, what a nice tool build is, thanks.
>
> But still some troubles,
> to include zh-cn in typemaps, I inserted <variant>zh-cn</variant> in
> *.xml.meta,
> when I cvs update later, all meta files were flaged 'M', and prevent
> updating,
Nah, the 'M' stands for "modified", meaning your local file is a modified
version of the online file. When updating 'M' files, cvs tries to merge any
online changes into your modified version. If that fails, the 'M' file
becomes a 'C' file ("conflict") - which in fact prevents updating. If you
look into such a 'C' file, you will see the critical sections marked with
"<<<<<<<" (without quotes) and accompanying revision numbers.
However, in the case of the typemaps and metafiles, just another 'build
metafiles' should fix that (it runs a perlscript, which checks the content of
the metafile against the actually available file variants).
nd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Posted by kajaa <ka...@eastday.com>.
I've got it, what a nice tool build is, thanks.
But still some troubles,
to include zh-cn in typemaps, I inserted <variant>zh-cn</variant> in
*.xml.meta,
when I cvs update later, all meta files were flaged 'M', and prevent
updating,
Any ideas to deal with it? ... before we commit all *.xml.zh-cn.
kajaa
----- Original Message -----
From: "André Malo" <nd...@perlig.de>
To: <do...@httpd.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual
docs?
> * kajaa wrote:
>
> > We know that, the recent manual docs are now negotiated via type-map,
> > instead of MultiView as before. Having met the following problems, I
doubt,
> > are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for the manual docs?
>
> Not really strong. The main reason is performance (multiviews is slow on
large
> directories) and a real possibility to get forward/backwards compatible
URLs.
> For example, we may decide some day to split the languages *really* into
> different directories. That's not possible with multiviews. But with
typemaps
> no problem.
>
> > 1. there are more files in the docs tree to manage;
> > 2. for every new translated xml, say bind.xml.zh-cn, bind.html must be
> > modified;
>
> The files are automatically maintained with build metafiles :-)
>
> > 3. administrator who is providing the manual docs on his website must
adjust
> > server config.
>
> hmm, I don't buy that argument. The documentation is alive. But however,
the
> default config is distributed with a full-working and safe documentation
> configuration. It's just a c&p job (in the worst case).
>
> nd
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Ilia Soldis wrote:
> I've got the answer on my last question. But still - should I commit only
> translated files or also generated metafiles and type maps?
all the stuff needs to be committed (the online docs at httpd.apache.org are a
simple cvs checkout).
> When I last time commited only one translated file - the server built the
> documentation but it didn't build metafiles and type maps. Does it only
> "build all" or it also sometimes "build metafile"
Hmm. The server doesn't build anything. In fact, I've built the
transformations and committed them :) (Are you subscribed at
cvs@httpd.apache.org?)
The point is: 'build metafiles' needs perl in the PATH and is therefore not
automatically invoked. But I start to believe that's not such a hurdle and we
may invoke it automatically. Opinions?
nd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Posted by Ilia Soldis <so...@infolio.ru>.
I've got the answer on my last question. But still - should I commit only
translated files or also generated metafiles and type maps?
When I last time commited only one translated file - the server built the
documentation but it didn't build metafiles and type maps. Does it only
"build all" or it also sometimes "build metafile"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for manual docs?
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* kajaa wrote:
> We know that, the recent manual docs are now negotiated via type-map,
> instead of MultiView as before. Having met the following problems, I doubt,
> are there any STRONG reasons to give up MultiView for the manual docs?
Not really strong. The main reason is performance (multiviews is slow on large
directories) and a real possibility to get forward/backwards compatible URLs.
For example, we may decide some day to split the languages *really* into
different directories. That's not possible with multiviews. But with typemaps
no problem.
> 1. there are more files in the docs tree to manage;
> 2. for every new translated xml, say bind.xml.zh-cn, bind.html must be
> modified;
The files are automatically maintained with build metafiles :-)
> 3. administrator who is providing the manual docs on his website must adjust
> server config.
hmm, I don't buy that argument. The documentation is alive. But however, the
default config is distributed with a full-working and safe documentation
configuration. It's just a c&p job (in the worst case).
nd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org