/me hits himself on the head for not mentioning this earlier...but.. ...could we please move this thread to site-dev at apache dot org? The crossposts are no doubt annoying some people :-)
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 11:37:15AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > --On December 27, 2005 6:02:18 AM -0800 Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > * anakia > > * the source xdoc format is not simple or clean enough > > * the validation step is not complete enough > > * the transformation is not predictable enough > > * managing navigational elements is not simple or clean enough > > FWIW, I think these are all solvable with anakia or just not that important. Noted. What is and what is not important enough is something that takes potentially a lot of discussing...but I'm guessing having validated X(HT)ML is worth something... > For the apache.org sites that still use it (www, httpd, apr), it gets about > as close to your stated workflow as anything else we use today. Yup. Admireable, huh? :-) Of all our website tools, I still like anakia best. I'm not the only one. Heh. Geir set up Harmony with an anakia-based thing the other day :-) > If anything that you create has the same workflow as anakia, fine by me. That's the baseline. Either its more productive or it gets shot. > Altering the workflow to require Forrest or Maven-like characteristics is a > non-starter for me - this explains why I won't do a darn thing with the > Incubator site even though the site is dog-poo (both in site design and > content). aye. > I see too many people waste too much time fighting Forrest on > the Incubator to justify any investment of time on my part. I've seen so many people fight various doctools I'm putting some effort into fixing it. - LSD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
