Hi,
On 1/13/2006 12:57 AM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Andrew Ford wrote:
Kern Sibbald wrote:
...
My LaTeX experience is minimal, and I don't intend to be a DocBook
apologist, so I can't really comment on your experiences. I've found
DocBook, esp. in conjunction with the XSL stylesheets produced by Norm
Walsh et al., to work quite well for screen-oriented documents.
Page-oriented publications (like O'Reilly stuff) or those with heavily
tabular material (like cookbooks) haven't been my concern.
The lack of polished editing tools wasn't really my concern either,
considering that most folks who use and know about bacula probably do
most of their text editing in vi or emacs anyway.
Objection.
(Although I can only talk for myself - I do use vi, am more fluent with
emacs, sometimes I use notepad, Word, but most of my writing is done
with OpenOffice.)
The main point is that, when you use a plain text editor to work with
markup languages, you need a language that remains *readble*. LaTeX is,
IMO, rather good in that respect. And you get results that are much more
typographically correct or aesthetic or nice or whatever you want to
call it than what can be done with, for example, OpenOffice or Word.
That said, I have no agenda. If DocBook isn't your cup o' tea, then feel
free to ignore it. :-)
Arno
--
IT-Service Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Arno Lehmann http://www.its-lehmann.de
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
