> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > (snipped) > > Templates seem a bit . . . hackish. Mostly we also need > documentation writers to be/who are comfortable with working > with the XML code itself, tags and all.
First of all, we need _documentation_ and _documentation writers, don't we? > WYSIWYG editors just don't strike me as a good idea for > working on docs. Plus someone would have to make extensions > to it every time another feature or three is added to > GuideXML, like neysx's recent code highlights. > So, the template is the way: any good XML editor with a template behaves well when the doc doesn't fit template: it just switches to raw mode ;-) Afaicr, making extension to 100-200 lines of template is still far easier than patching a brand-new WYSIWYG editor, too. > As long as users can use a plain text editor (gedit, leafpad, > mousepad, bluefish, etc.), all they have to do (besides > validating it with xmllint before > committing) is run it through YosWink's repodoc [1], a > thorough GuideXML QA checker. How 'bout "Gentoo is about choice"? > > No need for big heavy editors like OOo and lots of extra > plugins/templates/etc. :) > OOo etc could make editing more productive for those not familiar with XML odds - just imagine why translation of Gentoo doc is so slow and weak? > Still, if this gets off the ground, I'll give it a test > drive. I'm not big on WYSIWYG, but I'll try it out. Thank you anyway. --achumakov -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
