[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I'll continue doing it, as I'm really into the docbook format now, it's just so clean!What do people think about this?
first look is good, some differences, but I have to look deeper into that. (comparing echo-css with subant)
Is eeeeee like a soft grey?
yep. RGB 000000=black FFFFFF=white
The generated docs are generated from the xdocs right?
no. Java-Sources --XDoclet--> HTML First shot of autogenerating the manual from the sources (somewhere in the proposal section)
As an aside, I'm converting the current html in docs/manual to docbook format, (copying them, renaming them as foo.xml and then replacing all the damn tags),
Lot of work - but with a future?
Ok, XDoclet would indeed rock to extract documentation from inside the source. Forrest, sorry I thought that was for websites (sort of like velocity), but I haven't studied it properly.I dont want to keep you doing that (it seems that you like doing that :) but we should port that to a more solid base. Which means: supported by the Ant team. ATM the manual is written in HTML. Our vision is writing the manual inside the java sources and generate the "readable" form via XDoclet. One of the ideas was *.java --XDoclet--> *.xml --Forrest--> *.html, *.pdf and let Forrest do creating a complete Ant manual as one pdf file using its aggregate facility.
When I've finished (and it's not as manual as it would first appear, although I could do with a transform html tables into docbook tabels script), the manual will be entirely in xml which can then be converted with a style task into html, pdf (via fop) or whatever.
I'm fixing them as I transfer the html to xml, but I'm not fixing the original html (doh!)
and I'm finding more than a few unclosed tags, spelling mistakes etc.
report them :-)
Kev
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
