Re: html to man page

Allegedly, on or about 5 April 2018, Sam Varshavchik sent: > This is not Docbook XML. I know that. I was using an example of something in HTML (forgetting to mention that), that's simple to read, but often gets mangled when translating between different mark-up languages. Convert back and

Re: html to man page

Tim via users writes: I'm pretty sure I've looked at Docbook, though could have been another thing. But what I found when using *some* form of intermediate language, that the conversions to other forms were not optimal. I might write a page with headings and subheadings, properly in sequence,

Re: html to man page

On 04/05/2018 08:29 AM, Tim via users wrote: Allegedly, on or about 4 April 2018, Sam Varshavchik sent: I find Docbook XML to be irreplacable, when it comes to writing technical documentation that serves as a single source of both manual pages and publishable HTML. I'm pretty sure I've

Re: html to man page

Allegedly, on or about 4 April 2018, Sam Varshavchik sent: > I find Docbook XML to be irreplacable, when it comes to writing > technical documentation that serves as a single source of both manual > pages and publishable HTML. I'm pretty sure I've looked at Docbook, though could have been

Re: html to man page

2018-04-05 0:29 GMT+02:00, Sam Varshavchik : > Andras Simon writes: [...] >> I can't resist recommending the late Erik Naggum's xml rant (one of >> many): >> >> https://www.schnada.de/grapt/eriknaggum-xmlrant.html >> >> To whet your appetite, here's a short excerpt: >> >>

Re: html to man page

Andras Simon writes: 2018-04-04 13:53 GMT+02:00, Tim via users : > Allegedly, on or about 2 April 2018, Cameron Simpson sent: >> I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source >> format for human written content. It is massively hostile to >>

Re: html to man page

... > I can't resist recommending the late Erik Naggum's xml rant (one of many): > > https://www.schnada.de/grapt/eriknaggum-xmlrant.html > > To whet your appetite, here's a short excerpt: > > "In many ways, the current American presidency and XML have much in > common. Both have clear

Re: html to man page

2018-04-04 13:53 GMT+02:00, Tim via users : > Allegedly, on or about 2 April 2018, Cameron Simpson sent: >> I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source >> format for human written content. It is massively hostile to >> authoring by hand. > > As I

Re: html to man page

Allegedly, on or about 2 April 2018, Cameron Simpson sent: > I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source > format for human written content. It is massively hostile to > authoring by hand. As I recall, it's meant to be human understandable (and editable with a plain text

Re: html to man page

On 2 April 2018 at 06:29, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > Can POD generate an entire web site, with an automatically-generated table > of contents? Well, Pod is a mark-up format. So no. But with tools like Pod::Html (https://metacpan.org/pod/Pod::Html) and Pod::POM

Re: html to man page

On 1 April 2018 at 18:56, JD wrote: > Hi all, > I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files, > all of which index into a subset of the 168 files. > > I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like > text file. > > Is there an app that can

Re: html to man page

On 02Apr2018 01:29, sam varshavchik wrote: Cameron Simpson writes: Well I was using Perl's POD format several years ago as my primary manual writing syntax, generates man and html. Good HTML to XHTML might be an easy transcription, I've not tried. Not specificly

Re: html to man page

Cameron Simpson writes: On 01Apr2018 23:55, sam varshavchik wrote: Cameron Simpson writes: There are plenty of popular human friendly formats out there like markdown and restructured text etc which render to various output formats. Which "human friendly" format can

Re: html to man page

On 01Apr2018 23:55, sam varshavchik wrote: Cameron Simpson writes: There are plenty of popular human friendly formats out there like markdown and restructured text etc which render to various output formats. Which "human friendly" format can I use which already has

Re: html to man page

Cameron Simpson writes: On 01Apr2018 18:19, sam varshavchik wrote: If this is your app and your documentation, I suggest you spend the time converting your app's documentation to Docbook XML, and then use docbook tools to generate both HTML and man page

Re: html to man page

On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 09:54:27AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source > format for human written content. It is massively hostile to > authoring by hand. Yes. > Prehistoric it is not. Old yes, showing its age yes. But prehistoric > is

Re: html to man page

On 01Apr2018 18:19, sam varshavchik wrote: JD writes: I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files, all of which index into a subset of the 168 files. I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like text file. Is there an app that

Re: html to man page

JD writes: Hi all, I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files, all of which index into a subset of the 168 files. I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like text file. Is there an app that can do this? I saw a few apps on google search, but none