incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com>
Subject Re: DITA for Doc?
Date Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:59:03 GMT
Is this something that the committers actually planning to do the work want?
It's not been clear to me which of the voices of this thread are among their
number.

Cheers

S.



On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Rob Weir <apache@robweir.com> wrote:

> Would it be worth considering using DITA for the documentation/help?
>
> I love ODF as much as anyone, but DITA was designed specifically for
> technical documentation, and has built-in facilities for making
> modular "topics" that then can be reassembled, with a "map" to
> assemble larger works.  This gives you the ability, for example, to
> have paragraph that only shows up in the Linux version of the doc, but
> not in the Windows version.
>
> You also get an easy ability, via the DITA Open Toolkit (which is
> Apache 2.0 licensed), to transform the DITA source into a large
> variety of output forms, including:
>
> HTML
> PDF
> ODT (Open Document Format)
> Eclipse Help
> HTML Help
> Java Help
> Eclipse Content
> Word RTF
> Docbook
> Troff
>
> The authors focus on the structure and content, and the layout and
> styling is deferred until publication time.  So you have a great deal
> of flexibility for targeting the same content to various uses.
>
> The other nice thing is that DITA is text (well, XML specifically), so
> we use SVN to manage the content, can do diff's, merges, use the
> editor of our choice, etc.
>
> I'd like to argue for the advantages of DITA as a source format here.
> I can probably find some volunteers to help enabled this.  The
> Symphony team uses DITA for doc/help, and we've already done the work
> of converting much of the OOo help to DITA.
>
> -Rob
>



-- 
Simon Phipps
+1 415 683 7660 : www.webmink.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message