Daniel Egger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd rather we simply render the XML directly because the mapping is
> tricky at two points:
You want us to include an XML renderer in the help-browser? That
doesn't sound like a simple solution.
> - The XML-transformation needs to be taught about creating files
> with a fixed name. This bit us before with SGML and is even more
> tricky with the DocBook/XML stylesheets.
What is tricky about 'xsltproc $xmlfile > $htmlfile'? OK, I have to
admit I don't much experience with the DocBook XML issues you
encountered when working on gimp-help but since I played with this
stuff for developer.gimp.org I cannot follow this argument. Perhaps
I need to take a closer look at gimp-help2 first...
> - The docs need to be kept in sync with the GIMP Source which is a
> tedious work.
How would your solution avoid this problem?
> I don't think we have enough manpower to get the help done in
> time. I've a business to run, have no idea where syngin is and it
> seems we still have no content writers. My guesstimate for efforts
> we'd need to put into it would be >400h to get something which is
But I would perhaps make sense to setup the framework and encourage
people to contribute help for gimp-2.0. We could setup some text that
is displayed for all missing pages and that explicitely encourages
people to write help on this topic.
Gimp-developer mailing list