David Crossley wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
...
I am also wary about turning Forrest into a poor person's
content management system by using htmlarea and such.
I agree I think we should deprecate the htmlArea plugin (it probably
doesn't work anymore anyway). What other plugins are there that cause
concern about being a poor mans CMS?
Well it is hard to know where the line is.
Our mission statement is intentionally vague.
http://forrest.apache.org/guidelines.html#mission
The Introduction on the home page also avoids
mention of it. Perhaps it would help to have an
FAQ about the CMS aspect.
Every day i intend to explore the new "NoteTaking" plugin.
(Oh, something wrong with the online docs.)
I suspect that that is a fine use.
The note-taking plugin is quite different from CMS. It is simply a place
to jot notes about each page. No version control, no user management
etc. They are rendered separately from the core content. All notes are
stored in a single file, linked to the source files by URL.
Editing is just a plain text form field - no wysiwyg or anything like that.
I use it in a (protoype) educational product that allows text books to
be distrbited as Forrest content objects.
I have no problem moving it over to Burrokeet if it blurs the boundaries
too much. Thinking about it it may be better to do that in order to keep
the distinction between publication and content editing. It would also
provide another off-site plugin which would be a good idea.
Ross
