Re: Blended, static site generator [WAS: Re: New LilyPond website]

[John Roper]

It is easier for users to write and it looks better. Blended exports human-readable files. Look at the website. http://jmroper.com/blended/

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 4:16 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 03.02.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Federico Bruni:
>> Il giorno ven 3 feb 2017 alle 11:31, John Roper
>> <address@hidden> ha scritto:
>>> OK, I was asking because I have written a static command line HTML
>>> site generator that builds from HTML, Markdown, reStruturedText,
>>> Textile, Plain Text (.txt), and Microsoft Word (.docx).
>>> http://jmroper.com/blended Is that versatile enough for you? Also,
>>> how do you handle translations?
>>
>> Yet another static site generator (SSG)? The purpose is simplicity?
>> (as compared to other SSG)
>> I don't have time to test it in the coming days.
>> The templates are simple HTML files with the added value of using
>> {{variables}}? I mean, you are not using any existing template system?
>>
>
> I can't comment on that right now.
>
>> ...
>>
>> Personally, I think that switching (for the website only!) from
>> texinfo to a static site generator based on markdown/html source files
>> and a simple template system would be wonderful.
>>
>
> +1
>
> Separating website content from general documentation should definitely
> be an option.

What advantages do you expect from it?

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

--

John Roper

Freelance Developer and Simulation Artist

Boston, MA USA

http://jmroper.com/