Re: wicked page export architecture
Sebastian Birnbach <[email protected]> Fri, 2 Feb 2018 08:04:04 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.horde.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CACTNBFNcwmGdnjQBrLbuqZ9vRhJ4KQV30c+eeJBa48sV5HkUdg@mail.gmail.com> |
I filed a corresponding RFE #14776 so as this matter is not forgotten. 2018-02-01 18:59 GMT+01:00 Jan Schneider <[email protected]>: > Zitat von Sebastian Birnbach <[email protected]>: > > 2018-02-01 10:53 GMT+01:00 Ralf Lang <[email protected]>: >> >> Am 31.01.2018 um 14:55 schrieb Jan Schneider: >>> > >>> > Zitat von Sebastian Birnbach <[email protected]>: >>> > >>> >> Wicked permits page exports in plain text, HTML, LaTeX and >>> reStructured >>> >> Text via links at the end of each page. >>> >> >>> >> Over the attempt to print out a page I went for the HTML format, to >>> find >>> >> out (thanks for pointing this out, Jan) that the corresponding link >>> >> returns >>> >> just a HTML fragment, lacking the header with the charset and >>> everything. >>> >> Bad for printing. >>> >> >>> >> Could someone please explain what the rationale behind the fragments >>> >> is? I >>> >> see that for automated export his may come handy, piping a page into a >>> >> larger text structure and everything. But said export is not API >>> >> functionality but user-clickable links. What use would a fragment be >>> to >>> a >>> >> user? And why is there no support for creating a printable page? >>> >> >>> >> Thanks for any architectural clarification. >>> >> >>> >> Sebastian >>> > >>> > There is no special reasoning for this. We send what the different >>> > renderers produce straight to the browser. Those links *are* APIs >>> > though, and definitely are used as such. We for example use the ReST >>> > export to synchronize documentation between the source code and the >>> > wiki. Thus we cannot simply change the output, since it may break >>> > existing consumers. >>> > The correct way would be to add a print CSS theme, so that the page can >>> > be printed correctly. >>> > >>> There should be a decorator layer between the API output and what the >>> user sees when clicking the link. Breaking the API itself may not be >>> best. >>> >>> >>> I agree, there should be a distinction between a full export (providing a >> standalone document), and a partial export (providing a processable >> fragment). Full export makes sense as a link, partial export may better be >> done through an API. >> BTW: Google often gives me links to wicked pages that are really exported >> fragments. This inconvenience could also be solved through removing >> 'partial export' links from wicked pages. >> >> Sebastian >> > > This would be an option for Horde 6, i.e. current master, then, where we > can break BC. > > > -- > Jan Schneider > The Horde Project > https://www.horde.org/ > > -- > dev mailing list > Frequently Asked Questions: http://wiki.horde.org/FAQ > To unsubscribe, mail: [email protected] > -- dev mailing list Frequently Asked Questions: http://wiki.horde.org/FAQ To unsubscribe, mail: [email protected]