Vincent Massol wrote: > Hi, > > Let's vote on how to handle the title behavior for the 2.0 final > release so that we're all on the same page. > > After talking to several people here's what I propose: > > 1) We remove the top level H1 only if the title compat flag is on and > the title H1 is the same as the top level H1 > 2) The compat flag is off by default in our distributions
Couldn't this be fixed by migration so that we make sure all documents in a 2.0 instance are "clean": they have a title, same as the heading 1 if title misses or just the title if title = heading 1? If I understand correctly this would only be needed by upgraders, so why not build them correct documents instead of providing a flag to switch? > 3) We modify the Toucan and Albatross skins to display the title (same > as Colibri) -0 I don't like this idea of modifying the old skins: we're building a new, better skin, right? it's one of the improvements of the new skin over old skins, if people want to still use toucan and benefit from this, they should hack it themselves at their own risks (if any). It seems cleaner, even if not very user-friendly. > 4) We modify the Default XE XAR to have titles for all its pages (and > remove the header 1 in page content) This should also mean changing all =headings= to ==headings==, since semantically speaking, now that the page title is displayed with h1, everything under should be a h2, in a "normal" semantic. I don't see any use case when, in the document, there is a heading as important as the page title, but I agree we should allow it (if a user really really wants it). Actually, that's how I now see the structure of a document (how it should be built to be "correct"): title: |Page_title________________ == first section lorem ipsum == second section lorem ipsum Now, this would require adjusting section editing and default toc. In a doc structure based on h1 sections, we should provide section editing for the document title (so that the first section of the document can be edited through its associated H1) -- would this actually make sense for the user? > > This should cover both user upgrades and new behavior. Note that user > custom skin will still work in most cases since they're not normally > touching the contentview.vm file. > > Here's my +1 otherwise 0, it's hard to have an opinion, nothing seems right... Thanks, Anca > > Thanks > -Vincent > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
