[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070809151533.GA4955@ff.dom.local>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 17:15:33 +0200
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Koch?=
<hjk@...utronix.de>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Documentation files in html format?
On 09-08-2007 17:26, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Hans-Jürgen Koch <hjk@...utronix.de> writes:
>
>> Am Donnerstag 09 August 2007 12:31 schrieb Stephen Hemminger:
>>> Since the network device documentation needs a rewrite, I was thinking
>>> of using basic html format instead of just plain text.
>> Why don't you simply use DocBook? Then the user has the choice to convert
>> to HTML, PDF, LaTex or whatever.
>
> In my experience it tends to be challenging to actually find all the packages
> needed for that. And then it's incredibly slow -- seems to be much slower
> than gcc which is somewhat of an archivement. And at least for LinuxDoc TeX usually
> can't even compile the result.
>
> I would say the track record of existing DocBook deployment is not good enough
> to justify further use. Plain html can be converted into all these
> formats easily too and overall it makes a much nicer user experience.
>
> Also I would expect much more people will know how to write html versus
> DocBook.
In case of some counting: my vote is for Andi!
Down with DocBook!!! Go txt!!! Go html!!! Andi for president!!!
Jarek P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists