discuss: LDP / KDP?
Subject:
Fwd: Re: LDP / KDP?
From:
####@####.####
Date:
18 Jul 2001 19:55:22 -0000
Message-Id: <20010718195516.26995.qmail@web13805.mail.yahoo.com>
I was asked to forward this to the list, since the
author is not subscribed.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Well, upon reading the output produced from a make htmldoc in the kernel
source, I've been rather (read: very) discouraged.
I'm not sure there'd be much of a "market" for this, seeing as how much more
complete the inline-kerneldocs will be.
_still_, I like my format more, it seems like it'd be much easier to search,
and I think the format is much more ideal than docbook (which I have worked
with)
e.g., an example data file: http://derkarl.org/kerneldoc/data/init_timer.kd
And of course, I'm making no effort in preventing others from "syndicating"
these data files. With which it should be simple enough to generate a
printed form, and other formats from. In other words: it's a really easy
parse.
But the main problem is, it will be easier for the actual writers of the code
to maintain their docs inline, which will severely slow the acceptance of
this. So, it's a choice between inline docs and this. If there's any
approval of this ("officially"?), then I'de be open to discuss moving this to
something LDP-sanctioned, but of course, I wouldn't want to remove the
versatility that I have so far.
However, the main reason I didn't use docbook at first was _because_ I wanted
the versatility, and I didn't want something that behaved like a book.
e.g. http://developer.kde.org/documentation/library/2.0-api/classref/kdecore/
This documentation _is_ inline to the code (in the headers), generated via a
perl script "kdoc".
On Wednesday 18 July 2001 08:50 am, you wrote:
> Charles Samuels ####@####.#### wrote:
> (I'm only quoting your whole message because I'm
> cc'ing it to ####@####.####
>
> Have you considered writing this as an LDP Guide?
>
> Advantages:
> * Harness the incredible power of a virtual army of
> LDP volunteers. (Well, a virtual platoon...)
> * The docs become print-ready as well.
> * DocBook is a standard! Yay standards!
> * Use the already-present distribution network the LDP
> has in place.
>
> Disadvantages:
> * Your formatting looks spiffier than the LDP
> stylesheets.
> * You'd have to rewrite what you have.
> * DocBook is not tailored to your purposes.
> * Multiple versions will exist throughout the world.
>
> I believe it's an alternative worth considering. I'd
> be willing to convert what you already have to
> DocBook.
