Allegedly, on or about 5 April 2018, Sam Varshavchik sent:
> This is not Docbook XML.
I know that. I was using an example of something in HTML (forgetting
to mention that), that's simple to read, but often gets mangled when
translating between different mark-up languages. Convert back and
forth,
Tim via users writes:
I'm pretty sure I've looked at Docbook, though could have been another
thing. But what I found when using *some* form of intermediate
language, that the conversions to other forms were not optimal.
I might write a page with headings and subheadings, properly in
sequence,
On 04/05/2018 08:29 AM, Tim via users wrote:
Allegedly, on or about 4 April 2018, Sam Varshavchik sent:
I find Docbook XML to be irreplacable, when it comes to writing
technical documentation that serves as a single source of both manual
pages and publishable HTML.
I'm pretty sure I've looked
Allegedly, on or about 4 April 2018, Sam Varshavchik sent:
> I find Docbook XML to be irreplacable, when it comes to writing
> technical documentation that serves as a single source of both manual
> pages and publishable HTML.
I'm pretty sure I've looked at Docbook, though could have been anothe
2018-04-05 0:29 GMT+02:00, Sam Varshavchik :
> Andras Simon writes:
[...]
>> I can't resist recommending the late Erik Naggum's xml rant (one of
>> many):
>>
>> https://www.schnada.de/grapt/eriknaggum-xmlrant.html
>>
>> To whet your appetite, here's a short excerpt:
>>
>> "In many ways, the current
Andras Simon writes:
2018-04-04 13:53 GMT+02:00, Tim via users :
> Allegedly, on or about 2 April 2018, Cameron Simpson sent:
>> I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source
>> format for human written content. It is massively hostile to
>> authoring by hand.
>
> As I recall,
...
> I can't resist recommending the late Erik Naggum's xml rant (one of many):
>
> https://www.schnada.de/grapt/eriknaggum-xmlrant.html
>
> To whet your appetite, here's a short excerpt:
>
> "In many ways, the current American presidency and XML have much in
> common. Both have clear lineages
2018-04-04 13:53 GMT+02:00, Tim via users :
> Allegedly, on or about 2 April 2018, Cameron Simpson sent:
>> I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source
>> format for human written content. It is massively hostile to
>> authoring by hand.
>
> As I recall, it's meant to be human
Allegedly, on or about 2 April 2018, Cameron Simpson sent:
> I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source
> format for human written content. It is massively hostile to
> authoring by hand.
As I recall, it's meant to be human understandable (and editable with a
plain text edito
On 2 April 2018 at 06:29, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Can POD generate an entire web site, with an automatically-generated table
> of contents?
Well, Pod is a mark-up format. So no.
But with tools like Pod::Html (https://metacpan.org/pod/Pod::Html) and
Pod::POM (https://metacpan.org/pod/Pod::POM)
On 1 April 2018 at 18:56, JD wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files,
> all of which index into a subset of the 168 files.
>
> I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like
> text file.
>
> Is there an app that can do this?
>
> I saw
On 02Apr2018 01:29, sam varshavchik wrote:
Cameron Simpson writes:
Well I was using Perl's POD format several years ago as my primary manual
writing syntax, generates man and html. Good HTML to XHTML might be an easy
transcription, I've not tried.
Not specificly recommending POD, it was just
Cameron Simpson writes:
On 01Apr2018 23:55, sam varshavchik wrote:
Cameron Simpson writes:
There are plenty of popular human friendly formats out there like markdown
and restructured text etc which render to various output formats.
Which "human friendly" format can I use which already has
On 01Apr2018 23:55, sam varshavchik wrote:
Cameron Simpson writes:
There are plenty of popular human friendly formats out there like markdown
and restructured text etc which render to various output formats.
Which "human friendly" format can I use which already has tools to
generate both wel
Cameron Simpson writes:
On 01Apr2018 18:19, sam varshavchik wrote:
If this is your app and your documentation, I suggest you spend the time
converting your app's documentation to Docbook XML, and then use docbook
tools to generate both HTML and man page documentation from your docbook
so
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 09:54:27AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> I have to say I've very -1 on anything that uses XML as a source
> format for human written content. It is massively hostile to
> authoring by hand.
Yes.
> Prehistoric it is not. Old yes, showing its age yes. But prehistoric
> is
On 01Apr2018 18:19, sam varshavchik wrote:
JD writes:
I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files,
all of which index into a subset of the 168 files.
I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like
text file.
Is there an app that can do this?
I don't kno
JD writes:
Hi all,
I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files,
all of which index into a subset of the 168 files.
I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like
text file.
Is there an app that can do this?
I saw a few apps on google search, but none of
Hi all,
I have an app that has no manpage, but has about 170 html files,
all of which index into a subset of the 168 files.
I would like to use an app that will produce a single manpage like
text file.
Is there an app that can do this?
I saw a few apps on google search, but none of them are pro
19 matches
Mail list logo