Re: markup language for tutorial
Ardo van Rangelrooij <ardo.van.rangelrooij@tip.nl> writes:
> > A GROFF backend is under way, which would lead to plain tex, too.
> >
> > Looks good. Maybe texinfo is not so far away?
> >
> > Marcus
>
> So, this means I don't have to start working on the LaTeX/Texinfo
> output generators? If not, how do we then procede with debiandoc?
Woah there. We should get an experimental DSSSL first, and see how we
like it. There's a good change we just might not like it enough, we
might feel it's too slow, or maybe no-one is capable of
creating/maintainer the DSSSL.
> Adding handling of new tags to output generators which become obsolete
> in a short while seems to me a waste of effort. Further, the package
> will then consist of three parts: the DTD, the DSSSL stylesheet, and
> the scripts calling the various SGML tools.
Well, even assuming we have a good DSSSL, and we switch (still far
off, I tell you!), I would imagine that the DTDs and stylesheets out
be packaged together. The shell scripts wouldn't really be necessary
since you can accomplish the output directly with jade, though we
could wrap around jade for backwards compatability.
> Who's then going to
> maintain the package? The person currently maintaining the DTD and
> scripts, or the person who's going to write the DSSSL stylesheet
> (which will become the major part of the package)?
Let's not get ahead of ourselves!
> We could also keep (and extend) the current generators and provide
> two platforms: a Perl based and a DSSSL based. One of the points
> made in a discussion we had a while ago on this list about going to
> DocBook and such, was that jade etc. were slower (how much and to
> which extend I don't know; we should find this out).
Jade is damn slow, and docbook is way too complex for us.
> Providing the two platforms
> would give the Debian user the option to use the platform most
> suitable for the needs at hand. We could even split the current
> package in a DTD-only package and a Perl based platform package.
> Later on these two would be joined by the DSSSL based platform
> package. This would lead to some hassle with package dependencies and
> revisions, but personally I don't consider that a big issue.
Yeah, well it's all vapour until I see a DSSSL for debiandoc.
--
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: