[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: sgmltools & docbook
On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 09:32:05AM +0000, Terry Dawson wrote:
> Greg O'Keefe wrote:
> > I like the linux-doc sgml-tools stuff. I was able to learn it and start using
> > it very rapidly. DocBook on the other hand looks like a complicated nightmare.
> > I'm not a big time Linux author, but I sometimes like to write things up nicely
> > so others can use them.
> > If you are serious enough about it to write a book, then DocBook shouldn't be
> > an obstacle. But making it hard for would-be authors might mean that less
> > people write down and share what they know.
> The DocBook DTD really isn't any harder to use, indeed for many tasks it
> is simpler to use because it provides precisely the sort of structure
> you need for technical documentation. It just has more options
> available. You don't need to use them, just as you probably don't use a
> lot of what the LinuxDOC DTD provides.
> DocBook wins easily as soon as you want to do any of the more commonly
> used features of technical documentation like program examples, describe
> the syntax of something, or include a figure.
> What is a lacking is a simple document that describes how to write
> simple documents using the DocBook DTD. Matt's original "example.sgml"
> is what got most people started with LinuxDoc.
Spot on Terry, that's what go me started! If DocBook really is that simple,
then I'll take this opportunity to plead for someone to translate that
example.sgml. An hour or so's work could turn author resistance into
Also, surely it would be possible to write a LinuxDOC2DocBook converter.
I suspect that if I could see my work converted to DocBook, I'd soon work out
what is what and be able to maintain it.
learning@TasLUG, where people get together and
learn about Linux http://learning.taslug.org.au
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org