On Wednesday, 28 February 2007 at 23:10, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2007-02-28 09:47:07 +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote: > > Just a very stupid idea: why not play with asciidoc a little? It should > > do all what we want, we could finally simplify makedoc a lot and still > > get all output we want. Plus: the manual would be much easier to hack > > on, much smaller in size, etc. With some XSLT magic I think it could be > > more or less easy to create an initial asciidoc-based document. > > I've always disliked wiki-like formats. They are not robust enough. > DocBook, as being XML, allows transformations much more easily (e.g. > with XSLT), has a useful validation mechanism and more semantics. On the other hand it is much harder to write, and I doubt we need most of these extra semantics. I'd gladly trade the loss of some theoretical semantics for documentation that's easy for anyone to write or update. It's the same principle that makes wikis so popular. We just need to make sure that eg asciidoc does what mutt needs. No more than that, I think.
Attachment:
pgpNyh6RUa1LU.pgp
Description: PGP signature