If you are willing to get your hands dirty, as you say, there is no need for you to restrict yourself to the packages that Ubuntu offers, and thereby restrict yourself to DocBook 4. Setting up the components of a DocBook processing system is not that difficult, and you could use the latest versions of both the stylesheets and the schema. I would recommend you start with DocBook 5.

Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
[email protected]

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bob Plantz" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 10:26 AM
To: "Thomas Schraitle" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [docbook] Toolchain for beginner?

On 04/09/2013 11:26 PM, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
Hi Bob,

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 12:01:21 -0700
Bob Plantz <[email protected]> wrote:

I am almost there but cannot seem to get a good toolchain for writing
a programming book with docbook. [...]
Maybe take a look at DAPS, http://daps.sf.net
Not sure if this is what you need. To get an overview, look at the DAPS
Quick Start:
http://daps.sf.net/documentation/html/daps-quick.html

Thank you, Thomas, I'll take a look. But I do enjoy "getting my hands dirty" with low-level stuff. My books are on assembly language. ;-)
[...]
Since I'm new to docbook, my take is that I should start with 5.0.
DocBook 5 is prepared, but not really tested yet.

So, do you think it might be better for me to work with 4.x? I'm running Ubuntu 12.10. Their "standard" DocBook installation is 4.x. They have an online help wiki page on DocBook was written in December 2010 and is based on 4.x. I suppose that 4.x so widely used that it will not become obsolete soon -- probably not before my book becomes obsolete. :-)

--Bob


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to