My preference would be for the set of pages to remain a "living document" (directly editable/extendable) rather than end up as a "final" HTML set of pages. If I had to make a choice I'd prefer more basic effects/layout in order to retain the "living document" status.
Ideally there would be a nice, simple workflow to snapshot the current set of pages for other purposes (e.g. publishing on paper) (I understand DocBook shows promise in this area but have yet to see this in practise). Stylesheets can achieve pretty powerful effects these days and I'm pretty sure that with experimentation hopefully we can achieve an acceptable compromise between simple markup structure and effective page display that could be eventually added into the current stylesheet for the site. > From: Ian Clark > > I didn't want to confound a clear statement of the problem with the > details of one possible solution. Especially as I don't know enough > about Moinmoin to achieve complex effects (which I can do in html). > > Automated build vs hand-edited? Both. I've collaborated with > non-technical content providers to try and get the best of both > worlds, which don't necessarily conflict. See for example: > http://www.maxclark.me.uk/Frankie/ > > Now if you can show me how to achieve that effect in Moinmoin -- > yielding a usable interface for the content provider (a teacher of > English as a foreign language, with a low tolerance to cumbersome > markup) then what we could have is: > > {collaborative-source} --> {extended moin} --> {end-pages}. > > But what I expect to have to do is: > > {collaborative-source} --> {own hand markup} --> {own batch processor} > --> {simple moin} --> {more hand-editing} --> {end-pages} > > or: > > {collaborative-source} --> {own hand markup} --> {own batch processor} > --> {html} --> {end-pages} > > Own batch proccessor is messier, but with more migration opportunities > -- and I can see how to do it right now. > > Ian > > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Don Guinn <dongu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is this "content" file supposed to be supposed to be easily read and > edited > > or just easy to edit, but require some reformatting to make it look > good? It > > may be that JSoftware builds the dictionary from some internal file > which > > may be what you are proposing to construct. The internal formatting > of the > > html version of the dictionary looks like some automated build rather > than > > each hand edited. > > > > On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Ian Clark > <earthspo...@googlemail.com>wrote: > > > >> ...and comma-bang was supposed to be bang-colon. > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Ian Clark > <earthspo...@googlemail.com> > >> wrote: > >> >> which the novice will soon come to recognise (and may even write > into > >> >> her profile). > >> > > >> > Sorry, I meant: startup.ijs. > >> > > >> > Ian > >> > > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > >> For information about J forums see > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > For information about J forums see > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
