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

Re: docbook for DDP

On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 06:44:31PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> 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.

Table was converted to a list/taglist relatively trivially.  (I think it
will be nice we can move to table capable format soon.  But it takes
some effort.)

> > 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 so and both of you agree, cut and paste section I made into your
document.  It is already debiandoc-sgml format.

> 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.

By the way, can I start hands-on guide (XML) subdirectory.  Please see
my other post and suggest what shall be the directory name.

~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ +++++
        Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>   Cupertino CA USA, GPG-key: A8061F32
 .''`.  Debian Reference: post-installation user's guide for non-developers
 : :' : http://qref.sf.net and http://people.debian.org/~osamu
 `. `'  "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" --- Social Contract

Reply to: