Re: Bug#164000: ITP: xmltoman -- simple XML to man converter
Previously Michael Piefel wrote:
> I guess the main feature would be that it's usable. ;-)
docbook2man is perfectly useable.
> Actually, I really like the idea of docbook. Rather, I liked it when I
> just had had a quick look at it. I'm not so sure now. My docbook files
> all look so unreadable, and it's certainly hard to write:
> <funcsynopsis>
> <funcprototype>
> <funcdef>int <function>max</function></funcdef>
> <paramdef>int <parameter>int1</parameter></paramdef>
> <paramdef>int <parameter>int2</parameter></paramdef>
> </funcprototype>
> </funcsynopsis>
It's not hard to write at all. Also see the recent discussion on
debian-doc about docbook usage. You do not have to use the full range of
docbook tags to get good output, but in some environments things may
improve.
> Of course, you don't have to use all this, but what's the point of
> docbook then?
Standardized easily parseable format. You would be able to search for
`all tools that take a XXX type parameter and return something of type
YYY', something you can never do with groff.
Wichert.
--
_________________________________________________________________
/wichert@wiggy.net This space intentionally left occupied \
| wichert@deephackmode.org http://www.wiggy.net/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Reply to: