Re: DOCBOOK: docbook vs latex

[Robert =?iso-8859-15?q?Kr=FCger?= <krueger@signal7.de>]

>
> Easier to write, not necessarily easier to use.
>
> * Setting up a build system for translating DocBook to other
>   output formats requires either quite a bit of money for
>   commercial software, or quite a bit of time for open source
>   solutions.  Perhaps the time factor is true for commercial
>   software as true.

I got the impression from browsing mailing list archives. I haven't dared 
trying anything but using the ant style task with docbook-xsl because the 
chain of tools to use and the mails in the mailinglist were a little 
terrifying but we will probably try that in the not so distant future to make 
a decision. 

>
> * The firm structure of XML should make it easier to comprehend
>   than the rather erratic syntax of LaTeX ("fragile" commands?).

agree 100%

>
> > - docbook-xsl is a very flexible mechanism to generate and customize
> > html-output whereas latex2html doesn't seem to be maintained very well
>
> XSL is indeed great.  Bewarned, however, that printed output is
> problematic.

yes, currently I'm happy with the things I can do as far as the HTML output is 
concerned as I'm familiar with xslt. but now I'm faced with the printing 
problem for the first time which initiated my original posting. currently I'm 
even thinking of importing the HTML into a wordprocessor (openoffice) to get 
somewhat usable results. 

>
> * passivetex seems to be very challenging to set up, and the
>   standard DocBook stylesheets don't always work well with it.
>
> * FOP is still rather incomplete and/or buggy; I would never use
>   its output, even for casual use internally.
>
> * XEP looks very good from the evaluation version, but is quite
>   expensive for commercial use.
>
> We're sticking with DSSSL and Jadetex for now.  This means
> maintaining separate stylesheets (and dealing with DSSSL, ugh).

seems to be the only working inexpensive solution. is there a tutorial/guide 
somewhere for setting up the tool chain that you would recommend? I was 
trying however, to avoid having to deal with another stylesheet language 
(especially one as ugly as DSSSL). 

>
> > - docbook has some strange concepts (e.g. xrefs to a section resolving to
> > the
> >
> > "Sexction x.y" instead of just the number, making it unflexible for no
> > real benefit)
>
> This can be altered via the endterm attribute to xref, but if you
> want just the number, then:
>
> The default behavior is entirely stylesheet-specific.  If you
> don't like the behavior, change it, although I must admit that at
> this moment I'm struggling to identify the necessary change.

see my response to norm

>
> > - working with large documents appears to require more thought and
> > organization with docbook than with latex
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here.  The book structure is very
> simple; including external files via entities is pretty simple.
>

thank you for sharing your experience. helps a lot!

robert