Re: XML navigation tree

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Paul Cooper">

> I'm not wise and only slightly knowledgable but here's my thoughts;

har har ;)

>    <branch href="contribute/">
>      <title>Contribute</title>
>      <icon>images/menu/contribute.png</icon>
>      <page href="pow.php">
>        <title>Project of the week</title>
>      </page>
>      <page href="todo.html">
>        <title>TODO List</title>
>      </page>
>      <branch href="projects/">....</branch>
>    </branch>

Aha, schweet. Not sure about the <page> tags though, I don't know if they
fit in with the minimal goal of defining the nav data. They could always be
<branch>es though, I guess.

[ I'm a big fan of not using file references in URLs, as it allows you to
change things around more easily. ie. what was once an shtml file becomes a
php file, and your configuration system goes to poop. :) ]

> I would try to keep attributes to a minimum an keep most stuff as tags as 
> it allows more to be added in future without harming readability (IMHO). 

Indeedy, this is far, far clearer than my original.

> Looking at our mockups, each top level branch (general, software, docs,
> developer, cimmunity in the above, or whatever we agree) is a link in the
> top bar (over the trees and hills) and the branches / pages below that
> appear in the menu on the left.

Interesting, perhaps we can use this to our automative advantage? :)

> Also I'm not suggesting that each section should have an icon just using
> it as an example of extra things we might stick in there.

They might not be visible in the nav section or top bar, but it's a cool
idea for header gloss and things. Even though it was an example. ;) Scribble
this one down, for sure.

Thanks Paul,

- Jeff

-- 
             http://www.xach.com/debian-users-are-beatniks.html