2009/3/14 Mikhael Goikhman <m...@homemail.com>: [...]
> One of the examples of a pragmatical asciidoc that may be considered is > POD (Plain_Old_Documentation article in Wikipadia). Well, all perl > documentation in fvwm is already in POD, and the corresponding html is > generated from it. That's one possibility but very inflexible. No, we're talking about the manpage here -- and I wouldn't want to see POD used as a basis for it. I use POD on a daily basis; it's fine for perl and perl-related things, but as a generic markup for plain text for other documentation purposes, forget it. > Another example of asciidoc I use in my non-fvwm related projects is > wikitext (Text::WikiText on CPAN to be more specific, maintained by me). > >> I'm just wary of (excuse my language here) pissing over the people who >> put so much effort into the current docbook stuff. > > Exactly the same feelings. My webshite (sic) uses txt2tags [1] which has some advantages over asciidoc in that the markup is a little simpler, and unlike asciidoc, doesn't impose certain restrictions for templates (which expose limitations in docbook itself). I'm going to bite the bullet and after having finalised fvwm-convert-2.6 (which is all but done for review -- hopefully by the end of this weekend) I will turn my attentions to looking at what we might do about the documentation process [2]. -- Thomas Adam [1] http://txt2tags.sourceforge.net/ [2] I am not suggesting we do anything about it for 2.6.0, but I am sure I can handle stabilising 2.5.X and future work for now, albeit lightly. ;)
