Ian Oeschger wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >>contents.rdf file. There are plenty of examples around of what a simple >>one should look like if our app only wants a 'content' sub-directory but >>all go very quiet when we want to add skinning and locale support; How >>should the contents.rdf file be modified to support these? One example >>simply tells us to look at the jar file for the classic skin...all very >>well but where is the full description of the structure of the >>contents.rdf file, where is the syntax definition for this particular >>form of RDF file? At present we are making extremely slow headway having >>to sift through documents and examples for any scrap of information that >>will point us in the right direction. > > > Hi Bob > > I realize you are making a point here about the lack of > application developer information and not necessarily requesting > information about manifests and the chrome registry, but in case you > _are_ still trying to get this stuff working, I think Ramalingam > Saravanan's XMLTerm extension > (http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/extensions/xmlterm/) is a > great example of getting a Mozilla application organized, registered, > and installed. > > XMLTerm has a manifest.rdf that describes all three of the major > parts of the user interface in one file (which is what the monolithic, > manifest.rdf-style manifest does, as opposed to the part-specific > contents.rdf files), and he has a lot of information about > installatioin, bugs, building, and the application itself. > > The manifest is here: > http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/extensions/xmlterm/ui/manifest.rdf > Maybe we can talk about it in a couple of follow-ups? > > You're just right about the lack of good, whole application developer > info for mozilla, though. You've made me think that a separate and > largish document about the chrome registry and what it requires of you > in the way of manifests and scripts would be a great thing. > > (And this, in turn, makes me think that I wanted to mention the flip > side of the discussion about "createdoc/docnotes" we've been having in > this ng and in bug 157668, and that is some way of noting requests in > bugzilla for new documentation--'RFDs'--for which there are no notes > or content or relevant bug(s) yet. Creating RFD bugs and keywording > "createdoc" bugs might be two good, doable ways of getting lists of > docs needed and docs-in-waiting together, and also assiging them to > individuals.) > > > .io > >
Hi Ian, Thanks for the reply and also thank you very much for the link, I will have a long look at it during the course of today. A fully descriptive document about the structure and use of the chrome registry would be absolutely perfect, when can we have it? <grins> Although I have only recently started taking an active interest in this community, my (limited) knowledge of the way the mozilla group works leads me to concur that the use of bugzilla to raise documentation requests would be consistent with existing mechanisms for technical feedback to the group. It is heartening to see that the needs of the application developers are being listened to and taken seriously. I believe that the work of this group potentially has a great future ahead of it providing that sufficient effort is now put in to make it easily usable by application developers. Regards Bob Wilson Software Development Manager Games Network Limited Notitngham, England
