It is easier for users to write and it looks better. Blended exports human-readable files. Look at the website. http://jmroper.com/blended/
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 4:16 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org> writes: > > > Am 03.02.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Federico Bruni: > >> Il giorno ven 3 feb 2017 alle 11:31, John Roper > >> <johnroper...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > >>> OK, I was asking because I have written a static command line HTML > >>> site generator that builds from HTML, Markdown, reStruturedText, > >>> Textile, Plain Text (.txt), and Microsoft Word (.docx). > >>> http://jmroper.com/blended Is that versatile enough for you? Also, > >>> how do you handle translations? > >> > >> Yet another static site generator (SSG)? The purpose is simplicity? > >> (as compared to other SSG) > >> I don't have time to test it in the coming days. > >> The templates are simple HTML files with the added value of using > >> {{variables}}? I mean, you are not using any existing template system? > >> > > > > I can't comment on that right now. > > > >> ... > >> > >> Personally, I think that switching (for the website only!) from > >> texinfo to a static site generator based on markdown/html source files > >> and a simple template system would be wonderful. > >> > > > > +1 > > > > Separating website content from general documentation should definitely > > be an option. > > What advantages do you expect from it? > > -- > David Kastrup > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > -- John Roper Freelance Developer and Simulation Artist Boston, MA USA http://jmroper.com/
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
