Am Mit, 2002-11-06 um 22.11 schrieb Alexandre Julliard:
Well, I personally have no love for SGML, and I think the man pages
are just fine in troff.
If you don't like SGML, why is it the docs are SGML ?
If we'd convert those few man pages, we'd have more flexibility
(ability to combine docs
Martin Wilck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you don't like SGML, why is it the docs are SGML ?
Because I'm not the one writing the docs, and the people who write
them prefer to do it in SGML. I do update the man pages from time to
time, and I think troff is better for that; so if you want to
On November 7, 2002 11:31 am, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
I do update the man pages from time to
time, and I think troff is better for that;
I don't mean to argue (this is a subjective opinion),
but I am curious (knowing that you typically have
valid reasoning behind your opinions :)) why you
Dimitrie O. Paun [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't mean to argue (this is a subjective opinion),
but I am curious (knowing that you typically have
valid reasoning behind your opinions :)) why you would
think troff 'is better'. It's maybe simpler in the
sense that it does not require new
On November 7, 2002 12:23 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Clearly the tools are an advantage, but I also think the markup syntax
is better. Troff is not really that good, texinfo is better IMO; but
with both you have a reasonable chance to read the document in source
format, by simply skipping
On November 7, 2002 12:58 pm, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
I agree, but it's really a nice thing, and it's not doing much better than
*Sigh* s/nice/niche/
--
Dimi.
Could you give the name of a SGML editor viewer that supports syntax
highlighting ?
As for the almost-content nature of the SGML markup, I am 100% with
you.
I find it very difficult to work on it, plain text. But if your
editor
supports syntax highlighting (and most do, nowadays), it can
On November 7, 2002 01:24 pm, Sylvain Petreolle wrote:
Could you give the name of a SGML editor viewer that supports syntax
highlighting ?
vim
emacs
:)
--
Dimi.
Am Mit, 2002-11-06 um 18.19 schrieb Dimitrie O. Paun:
I had a similar reaction (never touched troff before), but you're
better off than trying to install the docbook tools :)
I guess that nobody did it (you have to set up the .sgml - troff
conversion as well).
That's a no-brainer, really,
On November 6, 2002 12:40 pm, Martin Wilck wrote:
The converted man pages could be part of CVS (as some other
autogenerated files are) so that users wouldn't be required to have
docbook in order to generate the manual pages.
We have to have the troff stuff in CVS, we can't require users
to
10 matches
Mail list logo
