On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)pobox.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Patrick Reilly
> The reason that I went the route of creating an extension vs a skin was
> I wanted the most flexibility in adapting the content for mobile device
> rendering. There are a number of sections that need to be removed from the
> final output in order to render the content effectively on mobile devices.
> So, being able to use a PHP output buffer handling is a nice feature. I
> wanted the ability to use many of the features that are available when
> writing an extension to hook into core functionality.
A combination of a skin *and* other extension bits
could probably be a good
future step for simply *adjusting the view a bit* ...
It would have been a extension providing the skin.
To clarify -- a skin alone can't really do
everything we want out of this
system -- it needs to be able to freely modify a large swath of output,
including rewriting content and styles and breaking long pages into shorter
I think it *could* do (almost) everything the ruby code did. I agree
we should want more of this system than that, though.
I talked with Patrick after the presentation, we will a look at it tomorrow.