discuss: OpenOffice.org
Subject:
Re: OpenOffice.org
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
20 Apr 2002 05:02:42 -0000
Message-Id: <20020419210521.B303@lafn.org>
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 06:37:04AM +0200, jdd wrote:
> Le Dimanche 14 Avril 2002 21:41, David Lawyer a ?crit :
>
> >already have an editor or word processor that they currently use and
> >don't want to have to learn another one just to write for LDP. ?So I'm
>
> I don't think this is right.
>
> first there is no such word processor, so you can't know what the writers
> would like to do,
Some would be willing to learn a new word processor but many others
wouldn't. We seldom hear from the ones who wouldn't since they don't
bother to volunteer as authors.
> second one can't simply type tags in a word processor because the full power
> of most of them is unusable in pure text mode.
Well, the macro definition features are usable and they can be used for
tags (for either Linuxdoc or Docbook). But this is easier to do for
Linuxdoc since one can get by with just several tags.
> most word processors are largely exchangeable as of they use (abiword,
> openoffice, koffice don't need real learning as do emacs or vi)
But if they only know emacs or vi it may not be so easy.
> writing technical documentation without images, tabulars or others
> objects is really a challenge and will, with the time, less and less
> useful. and so the need of power tools.
Diagrams can be readily drawn in "ascii graphics". Although Linuxdoc
supports tables, it's simpler just to make the table in ascii and use a
verbatim tag <verb> (something like <programlisting> in linuxdoc, <pre>
in html). The significant problems with the existing documentation are
that many are outdated and many topics are not covered. The lack of
bit-mapped images is not a significant problem IMO.
> anyway LDP must keep promoting a file format, not a word processor.
Not exactly. If other formats like LinuxDoc can be machine converted
into DocBook, then we should accept all such formats. But for a person
who doesn't know any markup language that converts to DocBook, I would
suggest LinuxDoc over Wiki-text since the LinuxDoc format looks closer
to DocBook. If one first learns LinuxDoc, and then later decides to
learn DocBook, much of what they've learned carries over into DocBook.
David Lawyer
