Re: Status and whats the staus?

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Steve Hall">

> In this scheme, the *only* thing beyond a static site is #3, where the
> server determines which layout CSS gets returned (2-3 letters). I can't
> imagine anything easier short of being 100% static.

Yeah, that's fine - I was referring to the idea that every single page would
be dynamic, which they won't be.

> > I'd just like to see more thought put into simplifying the current
> > design, in terms of browser-applicability, graphics, etc. The foot is a
> > good example because it's a pretty-only thing, it doesn't actually
> > enhance usability at all.
> 
> I'd like to see proof that we can get something up first, frankly.

Then I recommend HTML 3.2 and notepad...

> This list has been going since November 2000 and we still have only
> templates, graphics and drfickle's software map. Nothing else that I've
> seen, outside of list and IRC logs.

No, I've been working very hard on the publishing system whilst nothing has
been happening on the list for the last few months. Someone had to bite the
bullet and do it, so I did.

> The delivery won't depend on the templates. We can serve three different
> scrap HTML pages to prove we can determine the browser

Why are you so hung up on browser detection? It's not even a minor part of
putting all of this together.

> and can plug in *any* template/CSS/JS thingy we want, so let's not
> continue to make that an issue.

You're the only person working on those, and we want them to be fucking
kickarse - additional work can be done there whilst the rest of it is being
put together. It's two-person multi-tasking.

> A. A server

We have umpteen million servers, including the GNOME machines. Why is this
an issue?

> B. Server applet to parse the browser from the request, and do a few
> if/thans to select the CSS for it.

Not even remotely an issue.

> C. An authoring method which translates a submitted document
> (HTML/text/XML/whatever) to our storage format (XML).
> D. Code to auto-create the navigational HTML based on page location
> within the structure. (NOT dynamically, but when authored in #C above.)

That's what I've been working on for the last few months!

> I think we're contending #3/#B here. Rather than say we *can* do it, I'd
> rather us agree to whether we *are* or *are not* and proceed. Can we
> please make this decision and move forward? There's still a lot to do.

I still don't see what the rest of the system has to do with fixing up the
design issues.

- Jeff

-- 
   "You know, the crunchy, folk-singer part of me wants to believe that a   
     performance is a dialogue, but I can't hear a fucking thing you're     
                          saying." - Ani DiFranco