Subject:
RE: [discuss] DocBook is a catastrophe
From:
"Greg Porter" ####@####.####
Date:
17 Dec 2005 21:19:52 -0000
Message-Id: <000001c6034f$9e058760$46a29643@athlon>
I'm one of those (foolish) people that volunteer to convert <whatever>
documents to DocBook. I agree that DocBook appears very unwieldy.
However, as a maintainer of various work related documents in various
formats, I can attest that I intentionally switched to DocBook and I
don't regret it. At work I had multiple documents that I needed to
write/maintain in multiple formats (e.g., PDF, RTF, HTML, etc.). I got
VERY tired of invoking multiple separate editors, making multiple
separate changes, posting multiple separate documents, etc.
Once I converted these documents to DocBook, I basically could do one
simple command, "hit a button", and get a properly formatted document.
Need a PDF? Hit a button. Need a word doc? Hit a button. Inserted a
new chapter and all the page numbers changed? Hit a button. You can
make one change and generate all possible documents to post very easily.
So, yes, in comparison to maintaining a single document in <whatever>
format, DocBook is a catastrophe. However, when you have to maintain
multiple versions in various formats, it is *MUCH* easier to use
DocBook.
Like folks have said, you don't need to know DocBook. Give it to some
(silly) person like me, and we'll add the markup. Believe it or not,
adding the markup after the fact is very labor intensive. Documents
I've done in the past took *WAY* longer to markup than they did to
write. It's not quite fair. The author gets all the "glory" and us
"markup-ers" get the work. So like others have said, it might take us a
while to do the markup...
You'll see the benefit of using DocBook when you have to post various
changes to various versions in various formats. With DocBook you only
have to change it once.
HTH, regards, and happy holidays,
Greg
--
Greg Porter
Have linux, will travel.
Web: http://www.porterdavis.org/computing
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Scott ####@####.####
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 6:01 AM
To: ####@####.####
Subject: Re: [discuss] DocBook is a catastrophe
Yaroslav:
Please re-read all of the previous lengthy, exhaustive, time- and
energy-wasting, and completely unproductive threads on this subject.
My summary: LDP accepts Linuxdoc or DocBook-sourced documents, or any
other format as long as you're willing to wait for a volunteer to
convert it to Linuxdoc or DocBook.
Dan
On 12/13/05, Yaroslav Fedevych ####@####.#### wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 08:51:38PM -0600, David Horton wrote:
> > Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
> > >My Hard Disk Upgrade Mini How-To has been part of the LDP since
> > >July 1997. I'm working on another How-To, and I've been trying to
> > >learn DocBook. I'm convinced that this format, at present, is a
> > >catastrophe, and that we're discouraging many possible contributors
> > >by using it.
> > >
> > >DocBook is the COBOL of mark-up languages. It's incredibly verbose,
> > >and doing anything takes much longer than it should.
> > >
> > >Perhaps there's a tool to help prepare mark-up, but if so, it's a
> > >well-kept secret. The LDP Author Guide recommends Eric Raymond's
> > >"DocBook Demystification HOWTO", and it bluntly states that:
> > >
> > > "One thing we presently do not have is a good open-source
structure
> > > editor for SGML/XML documents."
> > >
> > >and that:
> > >
> > > "Most people still hack the tags by hand using either vi or
> > > emacs."
> > >
> > >I did try "txt2docbook". It produces DocBook all right, but it's
> > >completely based on appearance, not structure. It has lots of
> > ><para> commands, and nothing at all for tables and program listings
> > >and so on. You might as well use HTML and <pre>.
> > >
> > >I'm convinced that we're shooting ourselves in the foot by
> > >recommending DocBook at this time.
> > >
> >
> > There is a nice GUI editor from XMLMind that makes writing DocBook
> > very easy on the author. Their personal edition is a free download.
> > A short tutorial at
> > http://www.happy-monkey.net/docbook/gui-editor.html can get you
> > started quickly.
> >
> > Dave
> >
>
> And what if I cannot/don't want to use any GUI editor (or wish to not
> stick with proprietary software)? Shoot myself in the foot?
>
> > http://www.happy-monkey.net/docbook/gui-editor.html
> That domain name well speaks for itself. Is there something for
> mentally- enabled humans?
>
> By the way, conversion from DocBook to PS/PDF is terrible; in case of
> a large document, it's hardly _possible_. The only good conversion is
> done to HTML and to plain text (because there is lynx which does its
> job).
>
> XML _sucks_. Even LaTeX is not as verbose, and can still handle
> semantics of your text.
>
> --
> * For some reason, the United States is the only country on Earth
> where accidents don't happen . it's always somebody's fault,
and you
> can sue that somebody for neglect.
>
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
>
______________________
http://lists.tldp.org/
