Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMJ0=qG9YEUBpN=ntVNZdVebkZJCXH_jdsEyBJxJg35mpTDYVA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAF1jEfDg+MWPN+_miRR0=bsqAO6EtZpisSZ1Gkn7-uVgb5e_uQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOiJXP6Zz0E8WbO-LJB2sV3vt6099D_yx-YdFg9pJdGO=UK24w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF1jEfCiJ7NUhnd=GnRJOJ0E_XpMdZ_3eoH0YMqSMzjMSb_xkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOiJXP6fErzjXUG3hfZadqHMPbCjevaLQV=UbUeyEk_x=aguqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMJ0=qG9YEUBpN=ntVNZdVebkZJCXH_jdsEyBJxJg35mpTDYVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 08:40:55 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAL5zq9a-4vYSus=S5jMifmqNWw+2KKshqQ8C+PSTNm3XLxyqww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: asciidoc manual
From: Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
To: Accumulo Dev List <dev@accumulo.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I like the asciidoctor-maven-plugin, but agree the PDF limitation is a
big issue. Doxia has APT (Almost Plain Text) support, which is similar
to Asciidoc. I'd like to investigate that option, as well.

--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii


On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have used asciidoc for several projects and really like it.  One option
> is http://asciidoctor.org/.  It is a Ruby processor for asciidoc, but it
> runs in JRuby and even has a maven plugin,
> https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-maven-plugin.  Github uses
> asciidoctor for README.adoc and README.asciidoc files,
> http://asciidoctor.org/news/2013/01/30/asciidoc-returns-to-github/ and I
> even see traffic about using it from the JBoss community.  So it is in
> active development, well supported and growing.  The only issue I see is
> that asciidoctor does not support a native build to PDF, you still have to
> use the asciidoc toolchain.  But that may changed in the future,
> https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor/issues/113
>
> Mike
>
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:18 PM, David Medinets <david.medinets@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I took another look at the HTML and it was indeed the bright red strings
>> that I did not like. Otherwise, brilliant!
>>