does asciidoc have a formal grammar/syntax or whatever? i'm trying to look up one, but can't seem to find it.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvrie...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2014-10-08 at 10:49:33 +0200, Jan Stolarek wrote: > >> Therefore I'd like to hear your opinion on migrating away from the > >> current Docbook XML markup to some other similarly expressive but yet > >> more lightweight markup documentation system such as Asciidoc[1] or > >> ReST/Sphinx[2]. > > > My opinion is that I don't really care. I only edit the User Guide > > once every couple of months or so. I don't have problems with Docbook > > but if others want something else I can adjust. > > I'd argue, that casual contributions may benefit significantly from > switching to a more human-friendly markup, as my theory is that it's > much easier to pick-up a syntax that's much closer to plain-text rather > than a fully-fledged Docbook XML. With a closer-to-plain-text syntax you > can more easily focus on the content you want to write rather than being > distracted by the incidental complexity of writing low-level XML markup. > > Or put differently, I believe or rather hope this may lower the > barrier-to-entry for casual User's Guide contributions. > > > Fwiw, I stumbled over the slide-deck (obviously dogfooded in Asciidoc) > > > http://mojavelinux.github.io/decks/discover-zen-writing-asciidoc/cojugs201305/index.html > > which tries to make the point that Asciidoc helps you focus more on > writing content rather than fighting with the markup, including a > comparision of the conciseness of a chosen example of Asciidoc vs. the > resulting Docbook XML it is converted into. > > > Cheers, > hvr > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
