forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Juan Jose Pablos <che...@che-che.com>
Subject Re: Where is Docbook support going?
Date Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:09:32 GMT
David,

I do not think that we need to remove that stuff, but if you feel that 
it needs to be done, well, just ensure that Norm Walsh style sheets 
offers the same funtionality.

-0

Cheers,
Cheche

David Crossley wrote:
> I just started removing mention of the partial DocBook support.
> Then i stopped because i was not sure that we had reached consensus
> on this. Nobody spoke up about it after the below email, so does
> that mean that nobody is interested in the partial support idea?
> --David
> 
> On 2003-10-09 David Crossley wrote:
> 
>>Jeff Turner wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Currently, our Docbook 'support' consists of a stylesheet called
>>>docbook2document.xsl, and a mass of DTDs.  I'd like to know where this is
>>>all going.
>>>
>>>Firstly, is our aim to support all of Docbook, or even simplified
>>>Docbook?
>>>
>>>If no, we should define our supported subset in a DTD, so hapless users
>>>don't try to use the full thing, only to discover Forrest doesn't render
>>>it.  There's nothing more frustrating than not knowing a tool's
>>>limitations.
>>>
>>>If yes, we should turf out docbook2document.xsl right now, because trying
>>>to 'evolve' it to fully support Docbook is extremely foolhardy.  Norm
>>>Walsh has spent years working on his XSLTs.  We can't possibly compete.
>>>
>>>What do people think?
>>
>>There are two aspects to DocBook support.
>>
>>One is the ability to validate DocBook xml source documents during
>>the build. For that we need to provide DTDs (we do have some), or
>>documentation about how to configure their own (we do have that), or
>>a mechanism to download them if they are not on the user's system
>>(we do have a proposal for that capability).
>>
>>The other aspect is rendering the DocBook documents. We have some
>>documentation describing how to configure the full DocBook XSLTs.
>>The problematic piece is the alternative (yet minimal)
>>docbook2document.xsl which is not being enhanced or maintained.
>>I think that we should dump that and concentrate on better
>>documentation to describe how to configure full DocBook rendering.
>>
>>--David
> 
> 
> 



Mime
View raw message