Re: Switching to XML

["Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>]

On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 15:45 -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 15:26, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 21:58 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > > You can create, edit, convert, save, and open docbook xml in
> > > > OpenOfice.org.
> > > 
> > > Sure, there are more editing options with DocBook XML.  No one disputes 
> > > that.  But the question at hand was about processing the DocBook.
> > 
> > Yes which is generated from our use of SGML which is the core of this
> > problem and the core of the question as a whole.
> > 
> > SGML is making working with the documentation *harder*.
> > 
> > We have people that *DO NOT* contribute because of this SGML
> > requirement. They have what I consider extremely valid reasons, namely
> > it is dumb to require a writer to use emacs or write tags explictly.
> 
> I'm one.  I had the vacuuming stuff about written, but couldn't figure
> out the tool set this summer, and didn't have the time.  Does OO make it
> pretty much painless to work with?  I couldn't find any tools that I
> felt comfortable using for SGML / Docbooks.

OO treats Docbook like a normal document. You will however loose styles
(like bold, italic). It does support tables, it understands
transformation from things like sect1 (from OO heading1) etc...

The style loss is to be expected because Docbook doesn't contain
representation data. That belongs to a style sheet.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



-- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate