Harry van der Wolf wrote: >conversion from texi to wiki (whatever rout you choose) is very cumbersome > and very labour intensive.
and IMO the wrong way to go about the issue. Wiki format only makes sense if you want the pages to be editable in the Wiki. Good luck syncing with the official documentation if you do. IIRC it is possible to put HTML markup inside a Wiki page (which would need to be write-protected anyway). And maybe it is also possible to forward a Wiki page to a static HTML URL? I'd go the route of generating automatically non-editable versions of the official documentation. How about parsing the generated HTML and put around it a wiki "skin", with the same links (e.g. navigation/tools/search/toolbox) on the side? > I support both Christoph's point of view for having the latest up-to-date > versions with the source +2 > Klaus' point of view where it comes to easy access for a broad audience. +1 - a static HTML page is easy access enough. A PDF is an added bonus. A wiki page has no benefit IMO. Yuv --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
