ht2html-devel

[HT2HTML-devel] Future development

[Gre7g L. <gre...@wo...>]

I've been using ht2html for a while now.  I contribute to TMDA and as 
you may know, they use it to generate their web pages.

Question 1: (licence)

Is ht2html open source?  It has all the appearances of an open source 
project, but I don't see any agreement in any of the downloaded files 
or on any of the webpages.  May I freely modify this, distribute 
patches, or would it be best for me to join the ht2html group so I 
can submit CVS changes for added features?

Question 2: (practical)

I want to switch TMDA's design over from purely text-based:

    http://tmda.sourceforge.net/

To something a little more graphical:

    http://wolfhome.com/~gre7g/layout2.htm

This shouldn't be too impossible, but ht2html makes a bunch of 
assumptions that will sabotage the process (such as fixed size 
spacers).  Clearly those pieces of code would have to be overridden 
or changed to make this work.  Do you know anyone who has done this 
before or would I be breaking new ground?

Question 3: (philosophical)

I understand that ht2html allows us to build a class that can then 
override various portions of the output, but I was wondering why you 
chose to do this with with functions?

In other words, why have functions like get_style(), 
get_stylesheet(), get_banner(), etc. that only return a string?  
Wouldn't it have been simpler and more straightforward to just keep a 
class with a bunch of class constants such as style, stylesheet, 
banner, etc. and then allow us to overload these values?  It seems to 
me that it would be simpler and more straightforward to define values 
than functions.  It also makes more readible code to pull out 
variables than functions.

Thanks in advance for any insight,

Gre7g.

=================================================================
Gre7g Luterman   gr...@wo...  http://www.templeofluna.com/
Stay informed: http://www.templeofluna.com/keeper/mailinglist.htm

                 If it weren't for sex, none of us would be here.
               And of course, by 'here' I mean 'on the internet'.

Re: [HT2HTML-devel] Future development

[<ba...@zo...>]

I answered these in private email, so let me repeat myself...

    GL> Question 1: (licence)

    GL> Is ht2html open source?  It has all the appearances of an open
    GL> source project, but I don't see any agreement in any of the
    GL> downloaded files or on any of the webpages.  May I freely
    GL> modify this, distribute patches, or would it be best for me to
    GL> join the ht2html group so I can submit CVS changes for added
    GL> features?

It is open source, and should be considered to be covered under the
PSF license (with the words Python scratched out and the words HT2HTML
written in in crayon).

    GL> Question 2: (practical)

    GL> I want to switch TMDA's design over from purely text-based:

    GL>     http://tmda.sourceforge.net/

    GL> To something a little more graphical:

    GL>     http://wolfhome.com/~gre7g/layout2.htm

    GL> This shouldn't be too impossible, but ht2html makes a bunch of
    GL> assumptions that will sabotage the process (such as fixed size
    GL> spacers).  Clearly those pieces of code would have to be
    GL> overridden or changed to make this work.  Do you know anyone
    GL> who has done this before or would I be breaking new ground?

You'd probably be breaking new ground.

    GL> Question 3: (philosophical)

    GL> I understand that ht2html allows us to build a class that can
    GL> then override various portions of the output, but I was
    GL> wondering why you chose to do this with with functions?

    GL> In other words, why have functions like get_style(),
    GL> get_stylesheet(), get_banner(), etc. that only return a
    GL> string?  Wouldn't it have been simpler and more
    GL> straightforward to just keep a class with a bunch of class
    GL> constants such as style, stylesheet, banner, etc. and then
    GL> allow us to overload these values?  It seems to me that it
    GL> would be simpler and more straightforward to define values
    GL> than functions.  It also makes more readible code to pull out
    GL> variables than functions.

Mostly historical baggage from the earlier implementations.  I won't
make any claims about the cleanliness or flexibility of the code, just
that it's been Good Enough for our purposes up to now.

-Barry