[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Requiring use of DocBook; LinuxDoc
- To: LDP <>
- Subject: Re: Requiring use of DocBook; LinuxDoc
- From: Gary Preckshot <>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 01:10:37 -0700
References: <3955B73F.B0387DF9@inreach.com> <20000625175950.B9275@aphid.net>
- Resent-Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 04:21:02 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-Message-ID: <V1PHjC.A.WAH._DcV5@murphy>
Jeff Waugh wrote:
> * Not removing from DocBook, removing from example. Read into it a little
> harder, please, without issuing a flame.
I think you have a low ignition temperature.
> * DocBook is not 'obscure', it's quite straightforward.
There seem to be a lot of people who'd rather use LinuxDoc.
Their posts seem to describe DocBook as anything but
"straightforward." Certainly, there's a subset of folks that
think DocBook is too big for their computers.
> * Do you think DB:TDG is bad resource?
No, I think it's a reference, hardly a tutorial.
> * As a documentation writer, you need only care about your DocBook. DSSSL is
I need feedback. The ultimate objective is putting out
documentation that people can read, is it not? If I don't
know what effect the tags will have on the final product,
I'm running open-loop.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com