> tools for docbook are a complete disaster. (Has anyone actually looked
> at the documentation of Jade?!?) Linuxdoc may be politically incorrect
> these days, but its tools for processing it are far better than Docbook
> at the moment.
The issue isnt political correctness but design correctness here. DocBook
properly labels content not style, which Linuxdoc isnt doing right.
> So before someone starts pushing Docbook yet again, could that person
> work to make the Docbook tools *better*, instead of just pushing the
> Format That Will Solve World Hunger on to hapless victims that have to
> suffer the horrors of Jade? (I will note that there *still* isn't a
> docbook to txt conversion Open Source solution, whereas linuxdoc has
> such a tool already.)
I wonder how all my docbook files got converted into ascii. Actually there
are several two stage answers
db2html, lynx -dump
db2rtf then rtf2ascii
As to Jade - it works, it does the job. Its a complete horror to install but
thats ok because you get the rpms or debs for it.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 07 2000 - 21:00:08 EST