Re: Missing navigation

[James Henstridge <james daa com au>]

On 12/11/2003 11:25 AM, Glynn Foster wrote:

> Hey,
>
>  
>
> > It is SGML generated and begs the question, would library.gnome.org try
> > to unify the presentation of the docbook generated pages?  Do we want to
> > unify gnome-devel-docs from cvs into the library proper?  Should the
> > library have docbook source files?
> >
> > I think the answer is yes to my questions.
> >    
>
> Yeah, I completely agree - we should have our docs looking pretty
> online. I personally find the default docbook output pretty gross, since
> it doesn't include the navigation template. Ideally I'd like to see us
> having the following rules -
>
> 	o All html generated docbook documents MUST have a suitable
> 	  navigation template,
> 	o Any online documents MUST have an accompanied 'printer
> 	  friendly' format - I think that should be PDF.
>
> If we have those, we're on to a winner.
>
> As to how we unify things like gnome-devel-docs and library-web I'm not
> entirely sure. I guess I don't really like the idea of having another
> CVS module involved.
>  
These were the sample stylesheets I posted to this list a while back:
   http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-web-list/2003-August/msg00013.html

They demonstrated how you could produce manage Both XHTML -> XHTML and 
DocBook -> XHTML transformations to produce a consistent look for a 
website while sharing as much stylesheet code as possible.  (it looks 
like the list archive software has stripped the attachment names, but 
you should be able to get the picture).

While the default output of the modular docbook stylesheets is quite 
plain looking, don't assume that they aren't capable of producing 
something nicer looking (they are very configurable).  The gtk-doc HTML 
output is another example of customising the stylesheets.

James.

--
Email: james daa com au
WWW:   http://www.daa.com.au/~james/