Re: [ba-ohs-talk] release of mhpurple.pl v0.1
On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Eugene Eric Kim wrote: (01)
> > Eugene, could I get from you the rc file that bootstrap uses, plus the
> > stylesheets involved in the archives? I'd like to experiment with them
> > to see what I can work out.
>
> I've posted sample rc files at:
>
> http://www.eekim.com/software/mhonarc/ba-test/ (02)
Got 'em, thank you. Clearly put together. I have some test stuff
working well with those rc files and the CSS stuff as well. (03)
> > - archive maintainers may find purple numbers a little easier to
> > swallow if the style sheet info could be inlined in some fashion
> > (thus minimizing the number of adjustments that would be necessary to
> > add purple numbers to an existing archive setup)
>
> Not sure exactly what you mean here. Could you clarify? (04)
What I meant was that if purple numbers are to spread to other folks,
they need to be easy to set up in an effective fashion. They are sort
of ugly without CSS. The CSS can be made more easy to set up than
currently by either: (05)
- inlining the CSS in the text that is generated by the mhpurple.pl
script
- including purple.css in the distribution and including a sample
mhonarc rc file that people can use for reference (basically what
I've done with you, but taking out the email steps we went through) (06)
> > I don't I understand the current value of the link type field in the
> > link database. What's the goal there?
>
> To bring some sense to the backlink database. I may want to limit a
> graphical visualization of the data from the link database to certain
> types (for instance, "emailresponse"). Or, when searching a backlink
> database, I may want to attach greater weight to links of one type over
> another. In the future, this backlink database and the type field in
> particular could be used to support IBIS-style linking between documents
> (e.g. This document is an Idea for this Issue; this document is a Con of
> this Idea; etc.). (07)
Okay, that makes sense. I was confused by the use of 'html' as it
implied some kind of understanding of the content-type on the other
end of the link, which it doesn't have. (08)
Thanks.
--
Chris Dent <cdent@burningchrome.com> http://www.burningchrome.com/~cdent/ (09)