discuss: db2omf
Subject:
Re: db2omf
From:
David Merrill ####@####.####
Date:
8 Mar 2001 20:44:08 -0000
Message-Id: <20010308154258.C22810@lupercalia.net>
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 03:26:21PM -0500, Mark Komarinski wrote:
> David Merrill wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> > I think we've established that the details of omf implementation don't
> > belong in the author document, but we want them documented somewhere.
> > Scrollkeeper is likewise not an author concern but should be
> > documented somewhere.
> >
> > Whoever feels like attacking the documentation of db2omf, go ahead but
> > let us know you're doing it. It *will* go somewhere, but not in the
> > LAG. Once we have that db2omf documentation, we will make sure our db
> > recommendations in the LAG will have authors using the db properly to
> > support omf, but without specific omf references being necessary.
>
> I don't have an objection to documenting OMF in the LAG, as maybe the
> next "growth" area for the LAG is to start going into how we do
> our processing of documentation. There's plenty of DocBook-related
> groups out there using DB, but having trouble with the processing.
I agree, except that I think there should be a separate document that
covers processing. It really isn't relevant to authors. You're the
primary maintainer of the LAG, though, so it's your call.
--
Dr. David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project ####@####.####
Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org
Finger me for my public key
QOTD:
Sacred cows make great hamburgers.
