From: Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:05:29 GMT
Subject: Re: WIP: asciidoc replacement
Message-ID: <1D18C52E-BB96-49EC-97A9-F802D56CAFF5@wincent.com>
In-Reply-To: <85abr0y5ua.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>

El 3/10/2007, a las 10:12, David Kastrup escribió:

> What with output in print, HTML, info?

Yes, that's still a problem...

> Personally, I think it might make sense to just step away from the
> AsciiDoc documentation to Docbook: plain text (without cutified
> formatting control like in AsciiDoc) can be generated _from_ Docbook.

Yes, but editing DocBook (XML) is relatively painful compared to  
editing plain text. You either have to rely on a bloated XML- 
validating editor or instead ask your doc authors to manually write  
valid XML (and I totally agree with Terrence Parr that, "XML makes a  
lousy human interface
"; see <http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-sbxml.html>  
for his full take).

I know that Linus has argued for AsciiDoc because the source *is* the  
plain text documentation and is therefore easily readable, but for me  
the real benefit lies in the fact that *because* the source is plain  
text it is easily edited (ie. that the source is easily *writeable*),  
and things like documentation patches are very neat with AsciiDoc.

Cheers,
Wincent