Re: debiandoc-sgml vs. docbook
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.981129185208.28917J-100000@harper.uchicago.edu>, Havoc Pennington <rhpennin@midway.uchicago.edu> writes:
> However, I do want to understand the implications of any such
> decisions for working on my documentation. e.g., I have considered
> using DocBook in the past and rejected the idea; should I reconsider
> given your proposal? I think I can also tell you about the things
> that would be important for writing (e.g., the tutorial needs
> texinfo output and indexing).
No, basically it would be functionally irrelevant whether you used
docbook or debiandoc, or some other DTD, so long as you're using a DTD
which is supported by the debiandoc formal architecture. The same
reasons (which we've already talked about) why you may not want to use
docbook would continue to apply. The point is that the document
maintainer would have the freedom to write debiandoc documentation in
any DTD they wanted to.
It would also have the benefit of letting us use the docbook
formatting system if we *wanted* to, or we could use debiandoc's
perl/asp stuff too for any document which conformed to the debiandoc
formal architecture.
It increases freedom, not removes it.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: