discuss: Processing doco - and other links in the LAG (was Re: db2omf)
Subject:
Re: Processing doco - and other links in the LAG (was Re: db2omf)
From:
David Merrill ####@####.####
Date:
9 Mar 2001 17:04:46 -0000
Message-Id: <20010309120341.A311@lupercalia.net>
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 11:45:56AM -0500, Dan York wrote:
> David and Mark,
>
> > > 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.
>
> I'll just thrown in the comment that in helping others work with DocBook,
> the coding of it has been relatively trivial for them to figure out and
> get comfortable with it... the *processing* has definitely been the
> biggest problem for them... so anything we can do to help with that
> is definitely a *good* thing! The LAG is a good start, but any other
> examples will definitely help. (And I'll be glad to contribute some text
> once I get through a few more projects here in the next couple of weeks.)
Maybe we should revisit the concept of providing the processing as a
service. It shouldn't be too hard to accept email submissions and then
serve results back via http.
--
Dr. David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project ####@####.####
Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org
Finger me for my public key
Anyone who thinks UNIX is intuitive should be forced to write 5000 lines of
code using nothing but vi or emacs. AAAAACK!
(Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of commands, especially
Emacs.)
