[Docstring-checkins] CVS: dps/spec dps-notes.txt,1.35,1.36
Status: Pre-Alpha
Brought to you by:
goodger
|
From: David G. <go...@us...> - 2002-04-18 02:55:01
|
Update of /cvsroot/docstring/dps/spec
In directory usw-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv16052/dps/spec
Modified Files:
dps-notes.txt
Log Message:
fixed whitespace & updated
Index: dps-notes.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/docstring/dps/spec/dps-notes.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.35
retrieving revision 1.36
diff -C2 -d -r1.35 -r1.36
*** dps-notes.txt 13 Apr 2002 17:09:21 -0000 1.35
--- dps-notes.txt 18 Apr 2002 02:54:58 -0000 1.36
***************
*** 18,22 ****
[Tibs:] Eventually we need to have direct documentation in
there on how it all hangs together - the DTD is not enough
! (indeed, is it still meant to be correct? [Yes, it is.]).
- Rework PEP 257, separating style from spec from tools, wrt DPS? See
--- 18,22 ----
[Tibs:] Eventually we need to have direct documentation in
there on how it all hangs together - the DTD is not enough
! (indeed, is it still meant to be correct? [Yes, it is.]).
- Rework PEP 257, separating style from spec from tools, wrt DPS? See
***************
*** 35,49 ****
- Get cracking on the DPS itself!
! - Add layout component to framework? Or part of the formatter?
! - Add validation? See http://pytrex.sourceforge.net, RELAX NG.
! - Write modules for common transforms. See `Unimplemented Transforms`_
! below.
- Ask Python-dev for opinions (GvR for a pronouncement) on special
variables (__author__, __version__, etc.): convenience vs. namespace
! pollution. Ask opinions on whether or not the DPS should recognize &
! use them.
- Once doctree.txt is fleshed out, how about breaking (most of) it up
--- 35,49 ----
- Get cracking on the DPS itself!
! - Add layout component to framework? Or part of the formatter?
! - Add validation? See http://pytrex.sourceforge.net, RELAX NG.
! - Write modules for common transforms. See `Unimplemented
! Transforms`_ below.
- Ask Python-dev for opinions (GvR for a pronouncement) on special
variables (__author__, __version__, etc.): convenience vs. namespace
! pollution. Ask opinions on whether or not the DPS should recognize
! & use them.
- Once doctree.txt is fleshed out, how about breaking (most of) it up
***************
*** 60,74 ****
- Remove complex import code.
- Rename gpdi.dtd to docutils.dtd.
! - Rename writers/html.py to html4_css1.py. With aliases?
- Provide a mechanism to pass options to Readers, Writers, and Parsers
! through dps.core.publish/Publisher? Or create custom
Reader/Writer/Parser objects first, and pass *them* to
publish/Publisher?
- In reader.get_reader_class (& parser & writer too), should we be
! importing 'standalone' or 'dps.readers.standalone'? (This would
avoid importing top-level modules if the module name is not in
! dps/readers. Potential nastiness.)
- Perhaps store a name->id mapping file? This could be stored
--- 60,74 ----
- Remove complex import code.
- Rename gpdi.dtd to docutils.dtd.
! - Rename writers/html.py to html4_css1.py. With aliases?
- Provide a mechanism to pass options to Readers, Writers, and Parsers
! through dps.core.publish/Publisher? Or create custom
Reader/Writer/Parser objects first, and pass *them* to
publish/Publisher?
- In reader.get_reader_class (& parser & writer too), should we be
! importing 'standalone' or 'dps.readers.standalone'? (This would
avoid importing top-level modules if the module name is not in
! dps/readers. Potential nastiness.)
- Perhaps store a name->id mapping file? This could be stored
***************
*** 82,86 ****
- Considerations for an HTML Writer [#]_:
! - Boolean attributes. ``<element boolean>`` is good, ``<element
boolean="boolean">`` is bad. Use a special value in attribute
mappings, such as ``None``?
--- 82,86 ----
- Considerations for an HTML Writer [#]_:
! - Boolean attributes. ``<element boolean>`` is good, ``<element
boolean="boolean">`` is bad. Use a special value in attribute
mappings, such as ``None``?
***************
*** 106,109 ****
--- 106,112 ----
and substitutions for dynamic stuff.
+ - Improve the granularity of document parts in the HTML writer, so
+ that one could just grab the parts needed.
+
Coding Conventions
***************
*** 114,118 ****
PEPs, with the following clarifications:
! - 4 spaces per indentation level. No tabs.
- No one-liner compound statements (i.e., no ``if x: return``: use two
lines & indentation), except for degenerate class or method
--- 117,121 ----
PEPs, with the following clarifications:
! - 4 spaces per indentation level. No tabs.
- No one-liner compound statements (i.e., no ``if x: return``: use two
lines & indentation), except for degenerate class or method
***************
*** 121,126 ****
- "CamelCase" shall be used for class names.
- Use "lowercase" or "lowercase_with_underscores" for function,
! method, and variable names. For short names, maximum two joined
! words, use lowercase (e.g. 'tagname'). For long names with three or
more joined words, or where it's hard to parse the split between two
words, use lowercase_with_underscores (e.g., 'note_explicit_target',
--- 124,129 ----
- "CamelCase" shall be used for class names.
- Use "lowercase" or "lowercase_with_underscores" for function,
! method, and variable names. For short names, maximum two joined
! words, use lowercase (e.g. 'tagname'). For long names with three or
more joined words, or where it's hard to parse the split between two
words, use lowercase_with_underscores (e.g., 'note_explicit_target',
***************
*** 160,164 ****
Should this be done before or after reference-resolving transforms
! are applied? What about references from within one subdocument to
inside another?
--- 163,167 ----
Should this be done before or after reference-resolving transforms
! are applied? What about references from within one subdocument to
inside another?
***************
*** 168,175 ****
If the processed document is written to multiple files (possibly in a
! directory tree), it will need to be split up. References will have to
be adjusted.
! (HTML only? See Distributors_ below.)
--- 171,178 ----
If the processed document is written to multiple files (possibly in a
! directory tree), it will need to be split up. References will have to
be adjusted.
! (HTML only? See Distributors_ below.)
***************
*** 211,215 ****
- functions (+ formal parameters & defaults)
! (Extract comments too? For example, comments at the start of a module
would be a good place for bibliographic field lists.)
--- 214,218 ----
- functions (+ formal parameters & defaults)
! (Extract comments too? For example, comments at the start of a module
would be a good place for bibliographic field lists.)
***************
*** 254,273 ****
I've had trouble reconciling the roles of input parser and output
! writer with the idea of modes ("readers" or "directors"). Does the
mode govern the tranformation of the input, the output, or both?
Perhaps the mode should be split into two.
! For example, say the source of our input is a Python module. Our
! "input mode" should be the "Python Source Reader". It discovers (from
! ``__docformat__``) that the input parser is "reStructuredText". If we
! want HTML, we'll specify the "HTML" output formatter. But there's a
! piece missing. What *kind* or *style* of HTML output do we want?
! PyDoc-style, LibRefMan style, etc. (many people will want to specify
! and control their own style). Is the output style specific to a
! particular output format (XML, HTML, etc.)? Is the style specific to
! the input mode? Or can/should they be independent?
I envision interaction between the input parser, an "input mode" , and
! the output formatter. The same intermediate data format would be used
between each of these, being transformed as it progresses.
--- 257,276 ----
I've had trouble reconciling the roles of input parser and output
! writer with the idea of modes ("readers" or "directors"). Does the
mode govern the tranformation of the input, the output, or both?
Perhaps the mode should be split into two.
! For example, say the source of our input is a Python module. Our
! "input mode" should be the "Python Source Reader". It discovers (from
! ``__docformat__``) that the input parser is "reStructuredText". If we
! want HTML, we'll specify the "HTML" output formatter. But there's a
! piece missing. What *kind* or *style* of HTML output do we want?
! PyDoc-style, LibRefMan style, etc. (many people will want to specify
! and control their own style). Is the output style specific to a
! particular output format (XML, HTML, etc.)? Is the style specific to
! the input mode? Or can/should they be independent?
I envision interaction between the input parser, an "input mode" , and
! the output formatter. The same intermediate data format would be used
between each of these, being transformed as it progresses.
|