On May 17, 10:43am, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > Subject: Re: experimental release of linuxdoc-tools (based on sgml-tools 1 > "Greg Ferguson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I'd like to see if we can get linuxdoc support into the v2 > > sgml-tools packages. We'd need to provide the DTD and a > > set of DSSSL stylesheets along with perhaps a couple of > > catalog files. > > Um, I don't think linuxdoc *has* a DTD or DSSSL files.
Right. I have seen a DTD, but no DSSSL. I'm proposing that we create such a package and make it available for use with the standard tools (jade/openjade, etc.) -- in the same way Norm Walsh and the Oasis crew provide the DocBook DTD and the accompanying DSSSL stylesheets. > OTOH, SGMLtools Lite or whatever *could* support sgmltools v1 or > linuxdoc tools or whatever it is called. Supposing that software is > already installed, all it would have to do is provide the capability > to wrap around the linuxdoc scripts with it's own 'sgmltools' wrapper. > If anyone wants to do this, apply as a developer at sourceforge. I might be over-simplifying things, but I do not believe that will be necessary. I wouldn't want to see that, I think it adds too much complexity. > > Do you think we should go that route? That way we have 1 > > toolset (jade/openjade), with support for both DTDs (DocBook > > and Linuxdoc). > > I approve of one tool which is extensible -- it's name is sgmltools > lite, now a days. I object to the idea of merging the linuxdoc > perl/ASP or whatever it is back into the sgmltools lite package. We are in agreement. I certainly do not want to have to merge the (old) scripts into the new package and I don't believe that would be necessary. I do not believe this v1 / v2 discrepency is necessary, it causes confusion; and beyond Taketoshi, there does not appear to be too many others still working on v1 (linuxdoc) support. I believe we need to simply nail down a DTD and DSSSL package for linuxdoc...same model as what is done w/DocBook. Again, I might be over-simplifying this, and that is why I brought it up for discussion. The linuxdoc DTD is not too complex, so it may not take a huge effort to do this. If we can: 1) Produce a *maintained* package comprised of the linuxdoc DTD and linuxdoc DSSSL stylesheets 2) Fold that package into SGMLtools Lite (and/or SGMLtools v2) 3) Make the existing wrapper scripts "DTD-aware" (if this is necessary), then I believe we'd be in great shape from a tools perspective wrt linuxdoc support. regards, -- Greg Ferguson - s/w engr / mtlhd | [EMAIL PROTECTED] SGI Tech Pubs - http://techpubs.sgi.com | Linux Doc Project - http://www.linuxdoc.org |
