Michael Alan Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I write documentation for Debian, it'll be in DocBook---and maybe
> my first project should be a nice introduction---but it seems like
> debiandoc-sgml is not the evolutionary dead end I had thought it to
> be.
Someone is going to shoot me for
Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lets separate, if we can, the DTD from the processing structure.
> There's no reason why we could not build a DSSSL file make nice PS,
> PDF, TeX, RTF from the Debiandoc DTD. In fact, it's my project for
> a rainy day...
I intended my observation as mor
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Alan Dorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I won't learn debiandoc-sgml. It's application is so ridiculously
> limited, I wouldn't ever be able to justify the outlay in time. My
> entire reaction when Ian first introduced it was to smack my head
> and say, "
On 23 Nov 1998, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
> I won't learn debiandoc-sgml. It's application is so ridiculously
> limited, I wouldn't ever be able to justify the outlay in time.
DebianDoc can be learned in half an hour from its manual. DocBook takes
days, and oddly enough doesn't appear to be do
Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > This does bring up one thing, though---can we look at transitioning
> > away from debiandoc-sgml to something more standard, like docbook?
> > The backends in the latest sgmltools are supposed to be much more
> > sophisticated and produce better output
5 matches
Mail list logo
