> Thanks for the support earlier. This HTML business isn't likely to go > away, it is very likely to become the defacto txt document replacement. Don't be convinced! HTML needs to die very, very quickly. Of course, it's not going to very soon because it's so widely used, and imagine the trouble we'd have trying to get browser developers to get something else right... ;) > I can't imagine it would take that great an effort to migrate man pages to > HTML anyway. It could prolly be done as a separate module that simply > formats the man page on the fly. man2html :) > > (or if they must use SGML, they can use docbook <refentry> sections, > > which deliberately duplicate manpage structure) > > If there is a mechanism to do that then great. Wouldn't want to be > reinventing the wheel after all this advocacy for not doing so.... Well, given that HTML is an SGML derivative, and SGML was used many, many years before HTML became popular, there wouldn't be any reinventing going on. HTML has served its purpose as a simple means of publishing, and should now be relegated to the "one to throw away" bin. Using DocBook (especially given that an XML definition is available as of version 4), and XML generally, is much more productive. HTML doesn't offer the description of information that XML does, nor does it offer the flexibility with regards to such things as entities. In fact, the next few iterations of the GNOME documentation system will show how powerful this is. :) </rant> - Jeff -- please excuse the email software :) -- i haven't gnu parted the hard drives at work (yet) -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
