Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 18:16:32 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> Cc: doceng@FreeBSD.org, doc@FreeBSD.org, www@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CALL FOR REVIEW] doc and www converted to XML Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208201720330.84148@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <5032C4BE.5080209@FreeBSD.org> References: <50326A70.5020009@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208201640430.84148@wonkity.com> <5032C4BE.5080209@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Gabor Kovesdan wrote: > Em 21-08-2012 00:46, Warren Block escreveu: >> First, a question: will the .sgml filenames be changed to .xml? > > Yes but maintaining a branch with full of renamed files is more messy > than later renaming them in head. Probably we'll lock the tree for a > very short time and do a bunch rename. > >> Second, a note on related software: a couple of days ago, Steve Wills >> was gracious enough to make a port of Publican. Publican is the RedHat >> doc tool, which takes XML DocBook 4.5 and renders them to HTML or PDF or >> other formats. It has support for .po and .pot translation files. I >> have not given it a serious test, but it may be useful now that we have >> XML files. > > What benefits does it give us over directly calling the underlying > tools? I see it uses XSLT to render HTML and it relies on FOP for PDF. > This can be done with slight modifications of our Makefiles. Is it worth > adding one more layer? It would mean more vendor dependency and > performance penalty. From the documentation, my first impression is that > it also introduces lots of proprietary things: directory layout, config > files, commands and command-line parameters. [1] I think you can achieve > the same things by our simple Makefile macros and direct editing of the > XML files, which is not a high expectation towards doc committers but > requiring to learn a totally proprietary system may not be that welcome. Agreed. I think the primary benefit would be taking advantage of a toolchain that someone else maintains. I don't know how well it would work for us. The nice thing is that with DocBook XML, the choice becomes available. > Anyway, FOP is the best free renderer out for PDF but it depends on > Java. Publican also uses FOP. Personally, I think we should get a > compromise and depend on Java or otherwise we never will have modern > features and outlook in our PDF documents. With OpenJDK, Java is a lot less of a hassle than previously. > But some people will object so if we want quality we will have to > convince them whether we use Publican or not. > > [1] > http://jfearn.fedorapeople.org/en-US/Publican/2.7/html/Users_Guide/chap-Users_Guide-Creating_a_document.html#sect-Users_Guide-Files_in_the_book_directory > > [2] https://fedorahosted.org/publican/wiki/Installing > > Gabor >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1208201720330.84148>