Re: docbook for DDP
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 11:36:18AM -0600, Adam DiCarlo wrote:
> > As Osamu noticed, the library packaging guide needs tables which don't exist
> > in DebianDoc SGML. I'm quite open to switching the rest of the new
> > maintainers' guide to a more advanced format if it's going to help
> > making the document content better.
>
> Well, I don't think we should be XOR -- just OR is fine. That is, we
> can accept DocBook (XML? SGML?) as well as DebianDoc.
I'm not aware that one could combine both in the same document. Can you
really do that?
> As for the question, will the content be better in DocBook? No -- not
> without proper use of tags, education about DocBook, etc.
No, the content will be better because the new maintainers' guide doesn't
_have_ anything about library packaging, and integration of the library
packaging guide would obviously fix that.
If the integration of that content requires integration of those few tables,
and that in turn requires using a different format, that's just fine with
me, because the content is far more important than the formatting.
(Presuming the different format is entirely functional like DebianDoc SGML
is, of course.)
> Again: we should accept both. Josip, maybe you already meant that.
Yes, of course. I wasn't referring to anything in general, just about the
above.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: