[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Docbook website tutorial
Dave, that's an excellent overview! I have a few comments/suggestions: - inconsistent use of "docbook" vs. "DocBook" - perhaps use "Website" to differentiate the DTD from any arbitrary web site? - DocBook:TDG is co-authored by Norm Walsh and Leonard Muellner - Another reason to use Website is that it builds all of the navigation system for you automatically, once you have defined the structure. For the issue with versions in the directory names, you might suggest making an alias/symbolic link/shortcut instead of renaming the directory? Then you could easily switch versions by changing where the link points? I have used Website for some time as well, but use a combination of Make script, xsltproc, and rsync instead of ant. Rsync and xsltproc are standard in Mac OS X, and make is installed as part of the Developer tools, so the only items that need to be installed on OS X are the DTD and style sheets. I could send an example script if you are interested. -------- Brad Tombaugh mailto:Brad@Tombaugh.org http://www.Tombaugh.org On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:57 AM, Dave Pawson wrote: > Lou Springer wrote: >> This looks like really nice work. I'm going to have to try it out >> to give it a full workout. >> I have a question more related the tool chain design than the >> document. I assume there must be some constraint that prevents the >> use of standard Docbook 5 and the related HTML stylesheets? > > Yes, none of the website stylesheets are namespaced, i.e. they > process content in the null|default namespace. > > >> Also, do you think it might be helpful to recommend some editing >> tools? On the other hand, > > <grin/> NO. Most definately not! I hate flame wars/permathreads > whatever! > <stir>Anyway, there is only one editor? Emacs</strir> > > > I suppose there are many options that are already >> documented elsewhere on your site. > > I've tried to avoid it, editors seem to be such a personal > preference; all you can do is list them and report good > points bad points. Chances are that what I think are good > (features) others won't like, so IMHO it's just not worth it. > > Google for xml editors - try them and take your pick. > Oxygen is the only other editor I've come away thinking > good things about. > > regards > > -- > Dave Pawson > XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. > http://www.dpawson.co.uk
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]