On 8/24/07, Jan Van Besien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> I would like to known what the status/planning is for the docbook
> support in doxia.
>
> I prefer docbook over apt because it makes it very easy to generate a
> maven web site on one hand, and offline pdf documents on the other hand.
> Every maven website is just a 'chapter' and we have an offline docbook
> file that groups them all together in a 'book' which can be used to
> generate pdf from.
>
> I checked the code and saw that currently it seems to implement
> 'simplified docbook'. It does so in a non strict way (doesn't check
> doctypes etc), which makes most non 'simplified docbook' documents to
> work more or less (not everything is supported ofcourse) as well. Thanks
> to this, docbook 5 documents also work for all those features that
> existed in 'simplified docbook'.
>
> I like the approach, but still some changes in docbook 5 are
> incompatible with what doxia now supports (links to other pages for
> example).
>
> So my question, what are the plans with this docbook support? And maybe
> a suggestion: in stead of writing a docbook parser, couldn't we just do
> xslt transformations to html with existing docbook xsl stylesheets?
> Maybe not, because it would not comply with the structure of the maven
> generated sites...


Doxia doesn't really work that way. If you want to use docbook as a source,
then you need to be able to emit directly into a sink (the output). Although
you could use xslt to transform into another format (eg APT, or HTML) -
you'd still have to use that output's source to sink into the desired
output. The problem with chaining source=>sink=>source=>sink is that you are
left with a document that is only the intersection of supported features.
Make sense?

Your best bet is to expand the existing parser to increase support.

thnx
> Jan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


-- 
Eric Redmond
http://blog.propellors.net

Reply via email to