Update to the MODDB policy for phpBB3.

[Erik Frèrejean]

And therefor it should be good to change it, cause having the need of a couple of identical XSL files is kinda over done if you ask me .

[primehalo]

http://www.phpbb.com/mods/policies/gene ... _packaging

[Erik Frèrejean]

Thanks guys .

[Erik Frèrejean]

One more comment on the change in that policy (not sure whether this is the right place, but I think so). MPV still thinks that it is wrong to have the xsl not in the same directory as the xml

Click for full size

[Paul]

One more comment on the change in that policy (not sure whether this is the right place, but I think so). MPV still thinks that it is wrong to have the xsl not in the same directory as the xml

Click for full size

Thats because the policy still says that it should be in the same dir . we only allow different ways, as long the xml displays in firefox3 (And other browsers ofcourse).

[Erik Frèrejean]

Ok thanks for clearing that up Paul . I assumed that the whole policy was updated on that point.

[primehalo]

Pretty sure the MODDB policy regarding packaging was updated a couple weeks ago to lessen that restriction:
http://www.phpbb.com/mods/policies/gene ... _packaging

[iEric]

A question about #item1d

The filename for the MODX XSL must be modx.prosilver.en.xsl

I have a vague memory about reading a discussion some way back about this - that it was OK to rename the xsl file... (even encuraged to do it (sort of)) to avoid missconceptions it's a stylesheet, and not the edits for for prosilver.
I am probably wrong out this since I can read a "must" in the line now, but I'd like to have mine like: xml/modx.stylesheet.xsl in my folder if that's ok ? ...or is it '#item1d' that goes?
(I think that is a good name)

[Paul]

The checklist is incorrect (Can you please report it as bug in the website bugtracker?), its allowed to rename it, but we prefer to keep the default name.

[iEric]

OK thanks, and the report has been made.

[iEric]

The Firefox 3 security issue does not allow accessing files that are in a higher level on a file system (as in, if you use "../"), as I have verified on both Windows and Linux, but it has absolutely no problem with lower level access. I have repackaged all of my MODs like this, and Firefox 3 has no trouble with it:
./installation instructions.xml
./contrib/template subsilver2.xml
./contrib/language es.xml
./contrib/language ru.xml
./contrib/xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl

I just tested this and it was working on my (mac) FF3.0.3
./install.xml
./contrib/subsilver2/subsilver2.xml
./contrib/updates/update1.xml
./contrib/updates/update2.xml
./contrib/xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl

Using "../xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl" in the 3 last xml files.
If someone could test this... Will this work on PC too?

- - -
But anyway, what really confuses me , and if anyone could please explain why on this...

The FF3-issue:
Having the xsl file in root or in a subfolder within root - then you can't use "../../xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl" in your contrib/xx/somefile.xml to call the stylesheet.

But it does work to use ../../ in a linkgroup, when you link back to you main MOD file.

Code: Select all

<link type="dependency" href="../../Install.xml" lang="en">Main MOD file - Install.xml</link>

Why does it work in one situation and not both? What is the difference?
Not that it matter and we will use what works, but I was just curious on the different behaviours.

[primehalo]

The Firefox 3 security issue does not allow accessing files that are in a higher level on a file system (as in, if you use "../"), as I have verified on both Windows and Linux, but it has absolutely no problem with lower level access. I have repackaged all of my MODs like this, and Firefox 3 has no trouble with it:
./installation instructions.xml
./contrib/template subsilver2.xml
./contrib/language es.xml
./contrib/language ru.xml
./contrib/xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl

I just tested this and it was working on my (mac) FF3.0.3
./install.xml
./contrib/subsilver2/subsilver2.xml
./contrib/updates/update1.xml
./contrib/updates/update2.xml
./contrib/xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl

Using "../xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl" in the 3 last xml files.
If someone could test this... Will this work on PC too?

It will work on a webserver, such as if you are viewing the instructions on a localhost: http://localhost/install.xml, but it doesn't work if you are viewing it as a file on the hard drive, such as file:///C:/install.xml... or at least that's how it works on a Windows XP machine.

But anyway, what really confuses me , and if anyone could please explain why on this...

The FF3-issue:
Having the xsl file in root or in a subfolder within root - then you can't use "../../xsl/modx.prosilver.en.xsl" in your contrib/xx/somefile.xml to call the stylesheet.

But it does work to use ../../ in a linkgroup, when you link back to you main MOD file.

Code: Select all

<link type="dependency" href="../../Install.xml" lang="en">Main MOD file - Install.xml</link>

Why does it work in one situation and not both? What is the difference?
Not that it matter and we will use what works, but I was just curious on the different behaviours.

Because the link is just a link, which you click to take you to another page, while the XSL file is actually loaded by the XML file and affects how it is displayed and how it operates.

[iEric]

It will work on a webserver, such as if you are viewing the instructions on a localhost: http://localhost/install.xml, but it doesn't work if you are viewing it as a file on the hard drive, such as file:///C:/install.xml... or at least that's how it works on a Windows XP machine.

Yes, I noticed the "direct access" didn't work, however... if opening the install.xml first, then it was not a problem to navigate back and forth using the link-groups (assuming they're setup with a parent or depenecy link back to install.xml)... so, I guess it won't work as it suppose to anyway.

Well well.. It's a shame FF messed this up. Of course It can be told to the user to disable this uricheck in the browser, but I hope they come up with a better solution in the future.

Thanks for the answers!

[Paul]

Hi all,

The MODDB policy @ http://www.phpbb.com/mods/policies/general.php has been updated to include some missing items and some changed items.

We have added a new section regarding XML naming convention, regarding names of the XML files that can be included within a MOD.

We also have updated the section regarding Insta Deny, to include MPV.

We still like to hear feedback or questions from the community regarding the policy.

The phpBB MOD team.

[poyntesm]

Hi Paul,

Still no guidelines on language imageset files. Seems this file type is often forgotten.