C. Florian Ebeling wrote: >> And I think the more complex structured environment of DocBook has been a >> benefit. I realize that markdown (and other ones) support a structure as >> well, but we'd I think we'd have to come up with a fairly complex style >> guide for its use to support a consistent style to get the functionality >> we now have. In other words, we'd end up creating a DTD, which is what >> DocBook is. So my opinion is that it would take a lot of work to get the >> functionality we now have, and we'd likely not do a good enough job with a >> DTD to have as consistent a style as we have now. > > Ok, then let's just keep docbook. I thought other might consider it combersome > as well, but if that's not the case, then so be it :)
I agree with Florian that editing our guide is not very easy. XML is a nice exchange format for structured data, but I don't like to edit it by hand. Maybe we could consider asciidoc as it offers an easy syntax, but is in fact a converter from ASCII to DocBook XML. http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/ Rainer _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
