[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debiandoc-sgml vs. docbook



In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.981128233957.6503J-100000@harper.uchicago.edu>, Havoc Pennington <rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu> writes:
> If DocBook meets all our needs, why bother with the meta-DTD
> business?  Just use DocBook.

Docbook *doesn't* meet our needs.  It does meet the need for tables
(CALS model) and figures and all that, more or less.

. docbook is way to scary for newbies.

. docbook doesn't support texinfo or ASCII or NROFF output.

. even then we'd have a lot of work ahead of us to extend
docbook, i.e., the <package> tag, etc., etc.  Volunteer?

> If DocBook doesn't, then we still have to improve DebianDoc even if
> we do have the meta-DTD.

Well, let's say it wouldn't be as pressing.

> So either way there's no point in having a meta-DTD. No? :-)

No.

--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>


Reply to: