Hi, It's not easy to document in asciidoc. Personally, I have flashbacks to TGAL/TFORM (for you old Tandem folks) that we used in the 80s. Seriously?
I've opened a discussion on the dev community list on this topic. So far, no one seems to say that you MUST use markup languages for your documentation. >From what I see, we'd been trading off being able to do diffs in source control vs. having user-visible diffs in the documentation (via change bars) and a REAL word processor. To me, the tradeoff is simple: use the real word processor. In addition, I think it'd be much easier to translate documents and to get people to update them. Who wants to learn a markup language and all its intricacies. (Trust me, table handling is a royal pain and so is PDF translation.) I want to be clear that all forms of source control diffs disappear if we move to AAO: the .odoc files are really zip archives with several files in them. Also, we might lose the capability to provide the documents in web-page format; experimentation needed. What is your opinion on the matter? Would you be more willing to update documents if using AAO, which is pretty similar to working in Word. http://openoffice.apache.org/ -- Thanks, Gunnar *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
