Re: [install-doc] DocBook SGML/XML?
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 12:52:46AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> the previous installation manual has been partly converted to DocBook XML.
> But it did make intensive use of marked sections, which are not valid
> in XML. So in fact I guess that SGML processors will be used to convert
> it to the desired output formats. In this case, shouldn't it be in the
> DocBook SGML format instead?
> OTOH I would really love to see this manual converted to XML in order
> to be able to use poxml for translations. The marked sections could
> be replaced by specific attributes (like arch), but it requires some
> extra work. If there are volunteers to do this job, will this solution
> be considered, or are there good reasons to keep marked sections?
Well, I saw that they were not valid, according to the DTDs, but I
also saw how useful they were in the previous debiandoc manual. So I
left them in, thinking somebody could figure out a workaround, maybe a
debiandoc-xml that would preprocess the marked sections into real
separate xml documents before using the official xml tools to publish.
Since debiandoc-sgml handles marked sections, I thought the code must
really mostly exist.
I understand DocBook SGML is really a kind of theoretical animal
for which tools are not available.
I can work on it, but I need to know how to attack it. I do think
there are good reasons to keep the marked sections. Just considering
arches alone, we would end up with 11 different manuals with a good
portion of them all repeated, requiring 11 changes whenever something
common needed to be fixed. Also x11 translations.
Debian GNU/Linux Operating System
By the People, For the People
Chris Tillman (a people instance)
toff one at cox dot net