Douglas Gregor writes:
>> (2) Documentation authors should be free to use (almost) any document
>> format they like.
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. Do you mean that library
> authors should be able to do anything that DocBook allows?
I meant that while we're trying to create a format that includes the
necessary markup for the output we'd like to generate, it should be
possible for someone to come up with an entirely different DTD and to
use it -- as long as it provides the means to fulfil the requirements.
Basically, this says: The formatter should not care how the DTD is
called as long as all the tags are there. :-)
Alternatively, we could say "use BoostBook" and forget about it, but
it feels better to have the framework adapt to the users rather than
the other way round.
>> (4) It must be possible to link reliably from one library
>> documentation into another one.
> I don't like that as a requirement, but only because I don't know
> how to do it.
Good point. Let's keep that as a "nice to have" and decide whether we
can do it when we know more about the processing engine. DocBook's
<olink> basically only says: "You can define it ... But how to _do_ it
is your problem."
Clearly, if we're trying to do something like this, we're going beyond
the capabilities of XSLT.
-peter
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility
Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
http://hpc.devchannel.org/
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
