On Jul 8, 2004, at 5:02 PM, Peter B. West wrote:
Clay Leeds wrote:
Peter,
Did you get a chance to try the procedure Nicola recommended[1]? I haven't gotten a successful build yet, but I'm still working at it. When I do, I'll try to do as he suggested.

No, I've been too busy working on the FAD layout lately.

I can relate. Of course, there's also the 'issue' of you being a newlywed! Tell the Mrs. the 'guys' say 'Cheers!' :-)


I actually was getting stuck on the BUILD portions, but I was still using forrest 0.5.1. Much of the forrest development is going towards 0.6 which I believe has an imminent release (days? weeks? months? :-D). With all of the stuff going on (XML Graphics, forrest.apache.org, etc.) coupled with the fact that the forrest-site 'skin' is a bit outdated, I thought it best to work toward a 0.6 version of the FOP website. At the same time I'll also change to one of the other skins (css-style, xhtml-css, krysalis-site, tigris-site, etc.).

If anyone has a particular preference, please chime in! I'm leaning a bit toward the css-style, as it appears to offer the greatest flexibility, and seems to better leverage css over tables... But we'll see! As we're all anxious to see a Whole Site PDF (not to mention the 'new' logo :-D) I might use one of the others if css-style isn't ready in time.

BTW, how does Simon's recent Documentation[2] figure in to this?

I don't know. I think the fact that Simon's docs are Docbook based will militate against linking in to the sources, but Simon would be in the best position to answer this. If it could be done, it would be a great boon to the documentation.

That actually shouldn't be too hard... It appears that forrest is pretty much built to work with docbook[3]. We can either just 'stick it in the directory' and It Should Just Work(tm)--albeit with limited transformation of the presumably more advanced DocBook elements, or we can use the full DocBook stylesheets themselves (which is probably the preferred method). Each has its own issues.


[OT] militate? heh... there's a word I tend to 'try' to stay away from in every day conversation... (it's not that hard, as I don't think I've ever heard it...).

[1]
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=108680587917268&w=2
[2]
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=108844739724995&w=2

[3] http://forrest.apache.org/faq.html#docbook

Web Maestro Clay



Reply via email to