On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:41:19AM +0100, Michael Treibton wrote:
> If you don't watch this decision it will look like the same thing as
> docbook did - that it is here for no reason.
The requirements for what we want are still the same thing as what
Docbook brought us:
* The ability to render man pages;
* The ability to have the documentation in multiple files;
* The ability to render in different formats
I know Asciidoc can do this. I know that markdown can do this. I know
you can come back and tell me any number of the plethora of
typesetting/abstraction programs can do these things.
That's nice.
But heed my previous email; when you get down to it, *roff (mdoc) *is*
the abstraction layer. That mdoc allows for all these things, and is
still letting you use the very typesetting language man pages render
with, etc., is a winner in my eyes.
So far all you've done is peddle rhetoric. I take your point on board
about due consideration, and I like to think I've done that and
justified it. If anyone else can prove that we've got this wrong, or
that fundamentally, what mdoc provides cannot address a certain part of
the documentation, then I really do want to hear about that.
But I am not going to sit here and justify ever single point in as much
detail as I have done thus far; it's distracting me from my ABNF
work---you *do* want a documented parser at some point, right?
Now, if you'll excuse me...
-- Thomas Adam
--
"Deep in my heart I wish I was wrong. But deep in my heart I know I am
not." -- Morrissey ("Girl Least Likely To" -- off of Viva Hate.)
