On Mar 5, 2015, at 6:45 PM, Jacob Burroughs <math...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The way I see it, editing in Mediawiki syntax will necessarily result in the > loss of docbook semanticity. Therefore, if the goal is to preserve this > syntax, something other than simple conversion between docbook and Mediawiki > is necessary. However, if flattened semantics are acceptable, mediawiki > syntax would be viable. I looked some at the convluence plugins a couple > months ago, and it didn't look too promising, but someone else may have some > way to make it more worthwhile, as there is definitely a clearer starting > point than with Mediawiki. I think the goal at this point is as simply described earlier, with ability to edit source files or online and have everything be syncable. If that means using a subset of Docbook or avoiding features of Mediawiki syntax, I think we could manage. We would just want to document and test for what to avoid just like other validation steps we have in place. If someone finds another way, fantastic. At this point, though, we’ve spent years trying to get a near-100% solution while presenting outdated and incomplete docs — i.e., a 0% solution — to users… It’s okay if we have limitations. It so incredibly far more important to get something in place better than the zero-sync we have now. :) Cheers! Sean ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ BRL-CAD Developer mailing list brlcad-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
