180 lines
7.6 KiB
HTML
180 lines
7.6 KiB
HTML
<!-- MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
|
|
<!--X-Subject: Re: Simplified DocBook -->
|
|
<!--X-From-R13: Rnivq Znjlre <qnirNynsa.bet> -->
|
|
<!--X-Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 22:20:39 -0400 (EDT) -->
|
|
<!--X-Message-Id: 20001025175144.B228@localhost -->
|
|
<!--X-Content-Type: text/plain -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: uhf63qapg.fsf@software.com -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: 20001024040010.F140@localhost -->
|
|
<!--X-Reference: 39F675B8.FB7E9520@rebel.net.au -->
|
|
<!--X-Head-End-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML//EN">
|
|
<html>
|
|
<head>
|
|
<title>Re: Simplified DocBook</title>
|
|
<link rev="made" href="mailto:dave@lafn.org">
|
|
</head>
|
|
<body>
|
|
<!--X-Body-Begin-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
[<a href="msg04213.html">Date Prev</a>][<a href="msg04215.html">Date Next</a>][<a href="msg04225.html">Thread Prev</a>][<a href="msg04220.html">Thread Next</a>][<a href="maillist.html#04214">Date Index</a>][<a href="threads.html#04214">Thread Index</a>]
|
|
<!--X-TopPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-->
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-Begin-->
|
|
<h1>Re: Simplified DocBook</h1>
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><em>To</em>: David Lloyd <<A HREF="mailto:lloy0076@rebel.net.au">lloy0076@rebel.net.au</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Subject</em>: Re: Simplified DocBook</li>
|
|
<li><em>From</em>: David Lawyer <<A HREF="mailto:dave@lafn.org">dave@lafn.org</A>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Date</em>: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:51:45 -0700</li>
|
|
<li><em>Cc</em>: David Lawyer <<A HREF="mailto:dave@lafn.org">dave@lafn.org</A>>, Michael Smith <<A HREF="mailto:smith@xml-doc.org">smith@xml-doc.org</A>>, <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.linuxdoc.org">ldp-discuss@lists.linuxdoc.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>In-reply-to</em>: <<a href="msg04201.html">39F675B8.FB7E9520@rebel.net.au</a>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Mail-followup-to</em>: David Lloyd <lloy0076@rebel.net.au>,David Lawyer <dave@lafn.org>, Michael Smith <smith@xml-doc.org>,ldp-discuss@lists.linuxdoc.org</li>
|
|
<li><em>References</em>: <<a href="msg04180.html">uhf63qapg.fsf@software.com</a>> <<a href="msg04181.html">20001024040010.F140@localhost</a>> <<a href="msg04201.html">39F675B8.FB7E9520@rebel.net.au</a>></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-date</em>: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 22:20:39 -0400 (EDT)</li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-from</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-message-id</em>: <7Cb-V.A.6G.EW595@murphy></li>
|
|
<li><em>Resent-sender</em>: <A HREF="mailto:ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org">ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org</A></li>
|
|
<li><em>User-agent</em>: Mutt/1.0pre3i</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->
|
|
<pre>
|
|
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 03:25:04PM +0930, David Lloyd wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
> David et al:
|
|
>
|
|
> > I think that what we ask people to use should be far simpler than
|
|
> > HTML.
|
|
>
|
|
> Then they should use text, or a WYSIWYG/WYSIWYM editor.
|
|
|
|
Or LinuxDoc with just several tags in the body of the doc. It's a lot
|
|
simpler than most HTML docs one sees on the Internet.
|
|
|
|
> > LinuxDoc actually has many more tags than I use. But another
|
|
> > advantage is that tags are short and the <p> tag for paragraph is
|
|
> > optional (double spacing means the same as <p>). This means that much
|
|
> > of the doc when displayed on a 25 row terminal shows only plain text
|
|
> > (no tags are seen). Can DocBook do this?
|
|
>
|
|
> That is an invalid point. What I think you are saying is that you
|
|
> believe that short tags, and what amounts to tag abbreviation, is a
|
|
> good thing.
|
|
|
|
Yes. It makes it easy to add them manually using a text editor. It
|
|
also makes the result look better since it's uncluttered by tags.
|
|
|
|
> However you then add context and disregard the purpose of DocBook
|
|
> which, I contend, invalidates your argue on a logical level.
|
|
|
|
I agree that DocBook has more tags and more options and is thus better
|
|
in that respect. I argue that for some LinuxDoc is the best choice.
|
|
|
|
> If we were to prescribe DocBook XML as the markup language, I would
|
|
> argue that XML's insistence on proper form would assist everyone in the
|
|
> long run.
|
|
|
|
How would this help much? LinuxDoc also requires a certain form. It
|
|
even required that the doc has an <author> while DocBook didn't.
|
|
|
|
DocBook
|
|
> > Then LinuxDoc sometimes uses nested tags like a <Para> tag
|
|
> > inside an <ListItem> whereas in LinuxDoc no <p> tag is needed inside of
|
|
> > a <item> "element".
|
|
>
|
|
> I think you've mistyped at least one of the LinuxDoc's here.
|
|
>
|
|
Sorry. I meant DocBook
|
|
|
|
> > Should additional tags be created for LinuxDoc?
|
|
>
|
|
> Which would make it become like the "lesser DocBook DTD"...
|
|
Or mini DocBook DTD
|
|
|
|
> The reasons for having people create a validatable (not just well
|
|
> formed) document to submit to any publisher such as the LDP should go
|
|
> without saying. Whilst I do not intend to use LinuxDoc myself I am
|
|
> satisfied that it is a reasonable, easy-to-use and not too difficult to
|
|
> support DTD or other entity. Other people may choose to use DocBook SGML
|
|
> or XML for their own purposes; I use it in my professional work and find
|
|
> it natural to use when writing or submitting my "voluntary" documents.
|
|
>
|
|
> Conducting a debate centered around "LinuxDoc allows you to use [insert
|
|
> something here] whereas DocBook (because it's an XML or SGML DTD) does
|
|
> not" doesn't really prove anything given that LinuxDoc and DocBook are
|
|
> totally different items and cannot be so easily compared.
|
|
|
|
What it proves is that if one has to enter the tags manually, the
|
|
effort is much less with LinuxDoc. I also think that reading the
|
|
source is a bit easier with LinuxDoc due to less/shorter tags. In
|
|
spite of these advantages there are also disadvantages to LinuxDoc.
|
|
|
|
> The question we should address is "what benefits do LinuxDoc and
|
|
> DocBook display; given these sets of benefits is it worth
|
|
> supporting one, both or trying to find another alternative...."
|
|
|
|
I would say both, but at present the Author-HOWTO doesn't say a word
|
|
about LinuxDoc.
|
|
David Lawyer
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
|
|
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
|
|
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
|
|
<hr>
|
|
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
|
|
<!--X-References-->
|
|
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="04180" href="msg04180.html">Simplified DocBook</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> Michael Smith <smith@xml-doc.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="04181" href="msg04181.html">Re: Simplified DocBook</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> David Lawyer <dave@lafn.org></li></ul></li>
|
|
<li><strong><a name="04201" href="msg04201.html">Re: Simplified DocBook</a></strong>
|
|
<ul><li><em>From:</em> David Lloyd <lloy0076@rebel.net.au></li></ul></li>
|
|
</ul></li></ul>
|
|
<!--X-References-End-->
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-->
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li>Prev by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg04213.html">Re: Manifesto</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by Date:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg04215.html">Re: Simplified DocBook</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Previous by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg04225.html">Re: Simplified DocBook</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Next by thread:
|
|
<strong><a href="msg04220.html">about accepted formats (Re: Simplified DocBook)</a></strong>
|
|
</li>
|
|
<li>Index(es):
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li><a href="maillist.html#04214"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="threads.html#04214"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
|
|
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-->
|
|
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|