Since odf is one of their outputs already...
On Jul 6, 2011 5:11 PM, "Rob Weir" <[email protected]> wrote: > Would it be worth considering using DITA for the documentation/help? > > I love ODF as much as anyone, but DITA was designed specifically for > technical documentation, and has built-in facilities for making > modular "topics" that then can be reassembled, with a "map" to > assemble larger works. This gives you the ability, for example, to > have paragraph that only shows up in the Linux version of the doc, but > not in the Windows version. > > You also get an easy ability, via the DITA Open Toolkit (which is > Apache 2.0 licensed), to transform the DITA source into a large > variety of output forms, including: > > HTML > PDF > ODT (Open Document Format) > Eclipse Help > HTML Help > Java Help > Eclipse Content > Word RTF > Docbook > Troff > > The authors focus on the structure and content, and the layout and > styling is deferred until publication time. So you have a great deal > of flexibility for targeting the same content to various uses. > > The other nice thing is that DITA is text (well, XML specifically), so > we use SVN to manage the content, can do diff's, merges, use the > editor of our choice, etc. > > I'd like to argue for the advantages of DITA as a source format here. > I can probably find some volunteers to help enabled this. The > Symphony team uses DITA for doc/help, and we've already done the work > of converting much of the OOo help to DITA. > > -Rob
