Hi,

Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> On 05.07.2010 17:13:32 Simon Pepping wrote:
<snip/>
>> In compliance, I kept only 0.95, 1.0 and trunk. This caused extensive
>> changes to comments.
> 
> I guess keeping track of various versions on the website is one of the
> biggest issues why doing FOP releases is so hard. I keep wondering if we
> should not transform the actual product information to DocBook. But that,
> too, takes a lot of (initial) work.

Interesting. Do you mean completely replacing Forrest by a DocBook-based
framework? Because otherwise that would only add up to the complexity
IMO.

>From my experience I see the following pros and cons of using DocBook:
Pros:
• stable, well-known, well supported format;
• very well documented: http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/docbook.html
• geared towards technical documentation which exactly matches our
  needs;
• HTML output easily customizable by CSS;
• PDF output easily customizable by XSLT;
• well supported, excellently documented official stylesheets:
  http://www.sagehill.net/docbookxsl/
• I like it ;-)

Cons:
• horribly verbose;
• some work would be needed to turn the HTML output into a proper
  website; A website extension is available but I think it tends to lag
  behind;
• some currently automatically generated pages (like status.xml) would
  have to be re-created.

>From a personal point of view, I would be rather excited to work on
a DocBook-based website rather than a Forrest-based one. Mainly because
I’m more familiar with DocBook than Forrest that still looks a bit like
a black box to me. For example, I have already customized the PDF output
produced from a DocBook document, whereas I wouldn’t know where to start
with Forrest. The customization of the HTML output also looks easier to
me.

> 
> 
> Jeremias Maerki


That was my 2 cents,
Vincent

Reply via email to