On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 11:43:43AM -0800, Mike Orr wrote: > HTML is fine to get something out the door quickly, but it's not as > suitable for a long-term maintenance and storage. The tags are not > quite precise enough for word-processor-like formatting, but not general > enough to make the logical units individually extractable, or for > putting in hints HTML doesn't need but another format might. > > Yes, LaTeX's syntax is a major problem. I have to feel my way around it > for the Cheetah documentation. I refuse to buy a TeX reference because > it feels like throwing money away on a format that is obsolete (except > for documents with extensive mathematical formulas).
The best bet is to use XML for documentation and to translate from that to any format that is needed, DocBook does something like that and could be used at least for it's basis. The best bet as usual is to use logical markup of some kind and translate from there to the needed visual markup of HTML/XHTML or LaTeX. At my work we use LaTeX for documentation and it's not too bad to work with, my own univ. works were written in LaTeX using LyX and it was easy to do and get some very good looking results. LyX can also do DocBook. Baruch _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
