On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Alan Coopersmith <[email protected]> wrote: > Gaetan Nadon wrote: >> Slightly off-topic, this generation step from DocBook XML is really not >> worth the pain for such small man pages, considering all the complexity >> to be added in the makefile to stuff generated man pages in the tarball >> for platforms who don't have xmnlto. I had to say it :-) > > Some things we only learn by trying the experiment and seeing what works > or doesn't. If the cost of xml man pages is too high, then I can live > with permanently converting them for things like this, but when we can > end up sharing the text between specs & man pages, then I'd prefer that, > even at the slight tools cost, vs. having to maintain two copies. > > For instance, since the libSM spec has chapters that are basically > man page style synopis/parameter list/description of each function, > those could be put into .xml files that are used to generate man pages > (which libSM currently doesn't have) and included into the generation > of the spec.
One glitch in this is that it may be ugly trying to generate man pages and regular documentation from the same .xml file. man pages require a 'DOCTYPE man' vs regular documents which are either 'DOCTYPE book' or 'DOCTYPE article'. I haven't played with this much yet so it may not be that difficult. Just saying... Matt _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
