[pooma-dev] docbook overview

Fri May 25 23:29:02 UTC 2001

James Crotinger writes:
 > My main concern here is Allan's comment that the main authoring tool is
 > emacs. Don't get me wrong - I'm probably the biggest emacs user here. But I
 > want a WYSIWYG authoring tool for whatever we're doing. I've written tons of
 > LaTeX and done a couple of papers with HTML (without a WYSIWYG tool) and I'm
 > tired of it (unless I need a lot of equations - I still haven't seen a good
 > alternative to LaTeX for this [I'm very picky about formatting]). 

If you are doing alot of eqations, I've heard that Lyx is pretty good - it
purports to be a WYSIWYWant tool.  Sits on top of TeX/LaTeX.  I used it a
little and it seemed pretty good but don't yet have enough experience to say
for sure.  However, I think Lyx is probably not very relevant to what you
want for this project - just thought I'd mention it for the equation minded.

-- 
Dave Nystrom			email: wdn at lanl.gov
LANL X-3			phone: 505-667-7913	fax: 505-665-3046

 > If there are some decent WYSIWYG tools that can save their documents in
 > DocBook format, then that would be great, especially if there is a planned
 > path toward XML and if the WYSIWYG tools don't make gratuitious changes to
 > the ASCII file so that "cvs diff"'s are small when the changes are small.
 > 
 > 	Jim
 > 
 > 
 > > -----Original Message-----
 > > From: Mark Mitchell [mailto:mark at codesourcery.com]
 > > Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 11:57 AM
 > > To: scotth at proximation.com
 > > Cc: pooma-dev at pooma.codesourcery.com
 > > Subject: Re: [pooma-dev] docbook overview
 > > 
 > > 
 > > >>>>> "Scott" == Scott Haney <scotth at proximation.com> writes:
 > > 
 > >     Scott> Hi Allan,
 > > 
 > >     Scott> I have a few questions and concerns.
 > > 
 > >     Scott> Is it clear that HTML with CSS will not work for us?
 > > 
 > > Just about.  I've been there and tried that -- Netscape, for example,
 > > basically falls over on all non-trivial instances of CSS.  It doesn't
 > > just do the wrong thing: it crashes.
 > > 
 > >     Scott> This said, I think your points are quite valid in general
 > >     Scott> and maybe, in practice, DocBook is a little less scary than
 > >     Scott> it sounds from your message. Therefore, I look forward to
 > >     Scott> your report.
 > > 
 > > I strongly suggest that we go with DocBook.  One of the big advantages
 > > is the ease with which you can get printed manuals.  For example,
 > > O'Reilly now lets you give them source for a book as DocBook -- and
 > > they just print it, and you're done.
 > > 
 > > It's not actually as threatening as Allan made it sound :-), and any
 > > SGML editor will work fine with it.
 > > 
 > > It's also proven technology: we've been using it for months on some
 > > other projects, with good success.  Allan, you might want to contact
 > > Alex Samuel (samuel at codesourcery.com) to find out exactly how he set
 > > up DocBook for the work he's been doing with it.  But, as long we have
 > > a standard process to get set up, that's the important thing.
 > > 
 > > Thanks,
 > > 
 > > --
 > > Mark Mitchell                   mark at codesourcery.com
 > > CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com
 > > 
 > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
 > <HTML>
 > <HEAD>
 > <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
 > <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2650.12">
 > <TITLE>RE: [pooma-dev] docbook overview</TITLE>
 > </HEAD>
 > <BODY>
 > 
 > <P><FONT SIZE=2>My main concern here is Allan's comment that the main authoring tool is emacs. Don't get me wrong - I'm probably the biggest emacs user here. But I want a WYSIWYG authoring tool for whatever we're doing. I've written tons of LaTeX and done a couple of papers with HTML (without a WYSIWYG tool) and I'm tired of it (unless I need a lot of equations - I still haven't seen a good alternative to LaTeX for this [I'm very picky about formatting]). </FONT></P>
 > 
 > <P><FONT SIZE=2>If there are some decent WYSIWYG tools that can save their documents in DocBook format, then that would be great, especially if there is a planned path toward XML and if the WYSIWYG tools don't make gratuitious changes to the ASCII file so that "cvs diff"'s are small when the changes are small.</FONT></P>
 > 
 > <P>        <FONT SIZE=2>Jim</FONT>
 > </P>
 > <BR>
 > 
 > <P><FONT SIZE=2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> From: Mark Mitchell [<A HREF="mailto:mark at codesourcery.com">mailto:mark at codesourcery.com</A>]</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 11:57 AM</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> To: scotth at proximation.com</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Cc: pooma-dev at pooma.codesourcery.com</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Subject: Re: [pooma-dev] docbook overview</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> >>>>> "Scott" == Scott Haney <scotth at proximation.com> writes:</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> Hi Allan,</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> I have a few questions and concerns.</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> Is it clear that HTML with CSS will not work for us?</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Just about.  I've been there and tried that -- Netscape, for example,</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> basically falls over on all non-trivial instances of CSS.  It doesn't</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> just do the wrong thing: it crashes.</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> This said, I think your points are quite valid in general</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> and maybe, in practice, DocBook is a little less scary than</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> it sounds from your message. Therefore, I look forward to</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>>     Scott> your report.</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> I strongly suggest that we go with DocBook.  One of the big advantages</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> is the ease with which you can get printed manuals.  For example,</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> O'Reilly now lets you give them source for a book as DocBook -- and</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> they just print it, and you're done.</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> It's not actually as threatening as Allan made it sound :-), and any</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> SGML editor will work fine with it.</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> It's also proven technology: we've been using it for months on some</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> other projects, with good success.  Allan, you might want to contact</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Alex Samuel (samuel at codesourcery.com) to find out exactly how he set</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> up DocBook for the work he's been doing with it.  But, as long we have</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> a standard process to get set up, that's the important thing.</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Thanks,</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> --</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Mark Mitchell                   mark at codesourcery.com</FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> CodeSourcery, LLC               <A HREF="http://www.codesourcery.com" TARGET="_blank">http://www.codesourcery.com</A></FONT>
 > <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
 > </P>
 > 
 > </BODY>
 > </HTML>