A while ago we discussed our description of Forrest and concluded that it was a bit limiting.
Actually trying to concisely summarise Forrest is a very difficult task.
Here is what is was ... ------------ Apache Forrest is an XML standards-oriented documentation framework based upon Apache Cocoon, providing XSLT stylesheets and schemas, images and other resources. Forrest uses these to render the source content into a website via command-line, robot, or dynamic application. ------------
Here is my proposal so far ... ------------ Apache Forrest is an XML standards-oriented documentation framework based upon Apache Cocoon and separation of concerns. Using a plugin architecture, various source input formats are transformed into a common internal format, aggregated with other sources, and transformed into various output formats. Forrest can be used as a dynamic application or can generate sets of documents via the command-line and deploy with an automated robot. ------------
Two points, one a possible addition, the other a possible red herring.
[OT: does "red herring" make sense to the non-English speakers here, I'm not sure it would work in a literal translation?, just in case it means "A distractor that draws attention away from the real issue." (http://csmp.ucop.edu/crlp/resources/glossary.html)]
First the possible Red Herring:
Highlighting the "internal format" concept we may be asking for trouble. This appears to be the most common cause for concern for new users/developers. For example, "what is it?", "wouldn't XYZ be a better format?", "why do we need one?", and by far the most common "won't we lose semantic clarity?".
I would consider simply removing the reference to the internal format and focus on the transformation from one format to another.
Secondly the potential addition?
Perhaps add something like:
"Thus Forrest can present a unified document structure and design at the output stage regardless of the chosen input formats."
Ross
