discuss: wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc


Previous by date: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next by date: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 Re: wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, John R. Daily
Previous in thread: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next in thread: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 Re: wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, John R. Daily

Subject: Re: wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc
From: Saqib Ali ####@####.####
Date: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.4.55.0312090849540.21467@sjgcs1.stsj.seagate.com>

> easy-to-understand, simple, (etc) reason why newbie authors should choose
> LinuxDoc over DocBook.

I didn't know newbies should use LinuxDoc over DocBook. :)

1)
I would prefer everyone use DocBook XML (not SGML). This will help us
reduce the number of application/tools/utilities we have to list on our
reference page.

2)
Also if we choose to move to a XML publishing framework like Cocoon or
AxKit, it will be much easier if are using one DTD rather than support
mutiple DTDs.


Saqib Ali
-------------
http://validate.sf.net <---- HTML/XHTML/DocBook Validator

Previous by date: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next by date: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 Re: wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, John R. Daily
Previous in thread: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, Emma Jane Hogbin
Next in thread: 9 Dec 2003 17:11:08 -0000 Re: wanted: a really good case for LinuxDoc, John R. Daily


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.