Thomas Mortagne wrote: > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 16:09, Marius Dumitru > Florea<[email protected]> wrote: >> Anca Luca wrote: >>> Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 15:18, Anca Luca<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> 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 >> On the contrary, this means promoting level 2 headings to level 1 since >> the level one has become the title. But this should happen only to >> documents that have just one H1 that plays the role of a title. >> >>>> This is wrong, = does not mean page title, it mean level one section >>>> header. The fact that the graphical title of the page is a <h1> or >>>> something else is a skin implementation details it should not impact >>>> the content that way. >>> Then it should be implemented with a h2 (so that there is semantic room for >>> the >>> doc title), or we drop the idea of a document title that encompasses the >>> whole >>> content (because there is no way we can build a coherent document from a >>> semantic pov, wiki & html). >> IMO the title of a document is _above_ the level one headings which are >> like the chapters of a book.
they are, but semantically speaking (the html semantic) they would be just the same, even if we nicely style titles bigger and bolder. That's why I say that "there is no way we can build a coherent document from a semantic pov, wiki & html": when it will make sense in the wiki (it will have a title + =headings= under), it will not make sense in html; when it makes sense in html (h1 = title + h2s under) it would not make sense in the wiki since they will have to be marked with ==headings==. Thanks, Anca > > +1 > >> Thanks, >> Marius >> >>> Thanks, >>> Anca >>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> devs mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
