Re: Docbook notes

> Well, these alternatives still require editing text in some kind of
> special format that makes you look in the docs about the detailed
> syntax.  None of them is WYSIWYG.

The problem is that WYS isn't WYG either ... Where *you* see two 
headings, *Word* might see one Heading style line, and one Paragraph, 
font size 16, font weight bold. Both look exactly the same, they're 
meant to convey the same meaning, but they're different for 
processing purposes. 

For consistency, you'd still have to have docs detailing exactly 
what styles to use where. 

Would you regard Vim's helpfiles as requiring editing in some kind
of special format? I certainly would, but I find the format very
helpful and worthwhile to master, and not that exacting. Both 
StructuredText and reStructuredText look very like plain text, 
just with certain conventions, not more complicated than the 
helpfile format. 

Compare this:
 http://docutils.sourceforge.net/spec/pep-0258.html
and this, the reStructuredText source:
 http://docutils.sourceforge.net/spec/pep-0258.txt

Does that txt look like a pain to write to you?

> Using a restricted set of the docbook macros doesn't make it 
> much simpler.

The restricted set of tags does reduce the size of the reference 
you need to be familiar with. 

-- 
Jean Jordaan
http://www.upfrontsystems.co.za



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01