Re: Getting more people involved.. bye bye Docbook
| From: | Derick Rethans | Date: | Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:59:38 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Getting more people involved.. bye bye Docbook | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.doc |
| Request: | Send a blank email to phpdoc+get-969384583@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This means that the users/writers of doc have to learn the syntax
> >> anyway. So in my opinion it would be easier to teach them
> >> rST+Less-Extra-Rules than Mardown+More-Extra-Rules.
> >
> > From what I see in rST (and please correct me if I am wrong) this is
> > purely presentational markup, as is markdown of course. While right
> > now we have docs that we can actually parse with tools and get a lot
> > of information from it, and how things link to each other - moving
> > to purely presentational markup will destroy all this information.
> > Is it what we really want to do?
<snip>
> We have a very fixed organization of the docs, and although not forced
> semantics in a text format, they should still be easily extracted.
> In case of changelogs, those tables are the onlything under a header
> called "changelog" so shouldn't be hard to extract.
> Similar applies to examples.
Sorry, but I don't think you can convince me that rST/MD variants of the
synopsis and parameters can be more easily parsed than the XML
representation that we currently have. Don't get me wrong, I am not a
docbook fan, but it is *great* for showing semantics, whereas
rST/Markdown can never really give more than just presentation.
cheers,
Derick