Just an observation, and that is: one reason why I like to do my website in
XML is that I don't have to worry about the HTML. I know that DocBook
Website will produce some kind of HTML that browsers will render. The
appearance is controlled by the simple CSS, which I might change at any
time. My website might look a little different in different browsers but I
don't worry about that either.
I like the simplicity.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jochen Hayek" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 12:09 AM
Subject: [docbook-apps] Re: DocBook Website / style of the generated HTML
Sina K Heshmati <[email protected]> writes:
"Jochen Hayek" <[email protected]> said:
Sina K Heshmati writes:
"Jochen Hayek" said:
Sina K Heshmati writes:
"Jochen Hayek" said:
(2) Does is make sense, to let a designer improve the CSS for my
purpose?
It depends on what you mean by improving CSS.
Achieving something as neat as BeagleBytes.com as opposed to the
"default
Website".
Could you not just grab the style [3] of that website and apply them to
yours?
I see, SinDoc, you are a rather smart guy!!
That's exactly, what I planned to do short-term,
actually I wanted to let that get done by a friend,
but she is not as DocBook-minded as I am, so that looks a little
difficult.
Artist, a little main-stream web-designer, ...
The CSS customization to this website doesn't seem to be very deep.
I mean, the markup is the same table-rich HTML.
If you want to generate a table-less HTML layout,
given your DocBook Website source files and website layout,
you might want to take a look at SilkPage [2].
I am personally not really in a hurry regarding table-less HTML.
Did you not like the look-and-feel of SilkPage instances.
FWIW, SilkPage has other themes too but they're not equally elaborate.
The 'ala' XSL theme is the best, AFAIK.
I read about SilkPage before,
thank for the pointer anyway.
But I decided to be patient and be focused on DocBook Website itself.
(2) Will Website2 invalidate the CSS used for "Website-2.6", because
it changes
structure and/or naming (conventions)?
Yes, indeed!
So investment in nicer (temporary) CSS should be rather restrictive.
It depends on your preferences as to the final look-and-feel of your
website.
Once you define a target,
then there will definitely be a reasonable solution that takes your
toward your goal.
Well, pointed out, dear friend!
You earned yourself beer and pizza,
if you ever make it to Berlin or if we meet anywhere else.
Kind regards,
SinDoc
[3] http://www.beaglebytes.com/stylesheet.css
Yes!!!
Good man!
Thanks for your response!
How can we speed up the re-implementation? :-)
Kind regards from Berlin,
Jochen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
