If I understand correctly, it is proposed that the FOP doc sources be changed from the current forrest based format (and XML format) to markdown format. If this is correct, then I would like to voice my objection to making this change.
I am all for improving FOP documentation and management process; however, I am very leery about changing from an XML source format to a non-XML format, especially one that is as semantically sparse as the markdown format. If a change is to be made, then I would suggest that some XML format remain as the source format, and that markdown be one of a number of possible output (publishing) formats. Overall, I would prefer spending scarce resources on improving the depth, breadth, accuracy, and currency of FOP documentation content, rather than on switching to a different source format, management, or publishing format. I also feel it is very important to continue using FOP documentation to create *some* output format. I am not prepared to give up our dog food, as that provides one more set of tests on FOP, that would otherwise be missing. Given the sparseness of FOP test coverage, the more content we formally run FOP on, the better. G.
