2005/10/21, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Jose Gonzalez Gomez a écrit : > > 2005/10/20, Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> > >>Jason van Zyl a écrit : > >> > >>>On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 11:28 +0200, Jose Gonzalez Gomez wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Hi there, > >>>> > >>>>In the announcement docbook support is mentioned, but I haven't been > >>>>able to find anything about it in the docs. I've also found some > >>>>thread talking about docbook support in Doxia, but its web says > >>>>nothing about it. Finally the plugin matrix mentions a docbook plugin > >>>>that seems to be M2 ready... what's the situation? > >>> > >>> > >>>Docbook is supported by Doxia but we haven't tested it very thoroughly. > >>>Emm, is docbook working? > >> > >>I don't know. I never used docbook documents > >> > >> > >>>The support is in Doxia for sure which is the hard part. If we have to > >>>expose it that would only take 30 minutes. > >>> > > > > > > I'm very interested in it, so If somebody has those 30 minutes to > > expose it I would be willing to test it and share the result. > > > > I would also like the know if there is interest enough in adding this > > support, as I had written a simple plugin for M1, and I've been > > thinking in porting it to M2, but I wouldn't like to spend time on > > reinventing the wheel if there is somebody already working on this. > > I added support of docbook document in site generation. If you want to try > it, checkout m2 > trunk and bootstrap it. > put your docbook documents in src/site/docbook > I think docbook parser in doxia isn't finished but it's a start. >
Thanks a lot, I'll try to take a look at it as soon as possible. Anyway, I've been taking a look at the head revision of org.codehaus.doxia.module.docbook.DocBookParser.java, and I doubt that this parser is going to generate anything close to useful. I had the feeling that this class was copied from some other parser (maybe the xdoc parser, as indicated in the header comment): most of the tags used there are not part of the Docbook format, and there are some commonly used tags missing. I understand that the main objective of having such a thing as Doxia is to provide an homogeneous output so the whole site generated by Maven has the same look, but taking this approach means that you have to put a lot of restrictions on the input documents, or handle the whole document and convert it to the (commonly) lower level of detail used in the Maven output. I'm not sure this is a good approach for Docbook: Docbook is a rich format thought to cover the writing of a full blown book, and there is a lot of effort put in the Docbook stylesheets, that are highly customisable and lets you generate output in several formats. Using Doxia you would either have to use just a little portion of its full power, or duplicate a lot of effort writing a parser that is able to handle the whole format and reduce it to the Maven format. I mainly use Docbook to write RUP project documentation (requirements, use cases and actor specifications, risk lists,...). I use Docbook cause I can use almost WYSIWYG editors to create it, is control version friendly and I have the possibility of generating a lot of formats from Docbook. I'm lately thinking that integrating such a documentation into a Maven site it isn't a good idea but I still need some way to integrate this documentation and generation/publication in a more user friendly format into the life cycle of the project. So what I woud really need is a plugin that lets me generate HTML/XHTML from Docbook using their standard stylesheets; include this in the generated site, even with its own format; provide a link to access it from the Maven site; and finally include the documentation in the publication of the site... Well, just a lot of loud thinking... I would like to hear oppinions on this. Best regards Jose --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
