Personally, I don't think of Forrest as the panacea of web publishing. IMHO Forrest does one thing (well, more than one!), and does it well. I don't want Forrest to do everything for me, because there are better solutions out there. More comments inline.
On Friday 22 July 2005 6:51 pm, Tim Williams wrote: > I'm wondering how folks handle dynamic content within their Forrest > sites. While most folks are probably publishing fairly static, user > independent content, I wonder how folks are handling the dynamic > stuff. I would imagine there are many folks with 90% of their conent > being xml-based that works well with Forrest, but how do you handle > the other 10%? I guess a lot depends on *what* this dynamic content is. I run a blog and a photo gallery and use dedicated toosl for those (Wordpress, Gallery2) > 1) Permissions. Do you just use standard web server functionality to > handle permissions? What happens when you web site scales and you > need credentials independent of the server? Has anyone accounted for > that? Like I mentioned before, I'd rather choose a tool that was meant for serving dynamic content rather than try to get Forrest to do it (its good for hacking, but perhaps not for production). All good forum/blog/CMS/gallery tools come with multi user support, fine grained access control etc. > 3) Discussion Forum/Bulletin Board. Say I've got a site that's 95% > content but I want to have a simple discussion forum, how do i > integrate it? I've noticed one of the example sites uses IFrames but > that doesn't seem like a very clean solution to me. This is a good example of why I think Forrest is an overkill for such applications. I mean why would anyone want to write a forum post in OpenOffice.org or DocBook, or want to have forum posts output as text/PDF. What forums *do* need however is a good database backend, indexing, authentication, messaging and so forth. > This is obviously just a simple list but the point is that if Forrest > meets 90% of peoples publishing requirements and it can't meet the > other 10%, where does it leave us? Maybe the answer is just "forrest > isn't for you", but I have to say 90 is a high percent. I'm not sure I agree. Forrest meets 100% of my demands as far as static content goes. But static content is maybe like 30% of what I publish. I know its possible to run forrest in 'run' mode, but how many live Forrest websites actually do that? But thats just me :-) Diwaker -- Web/Blog/Gallery: http://floatingsun.net
pgpDWV0fJkfYb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
