Re: Online doc generator (Was: Re: [PEAR-DEV] Amsterdam meeting agenda)

On Apr 12, 2004, at 11:05 AM, David Costa wrote:

On Apr 12, 2004, at 5:54 PM, Paul M Jones wrote:

<snip>

That is not an answer to the question; you are talking technology, not requirements, and skipping vital parts of the decision process.

I am talking requirements too. I don't see any of your requirements to be incompatible with docbook or livedocs.

They may not be incompatible with other technologies, either. This is not DocBook bashing, it may end up being perfect. The point here is not to do DocBook apologetics, but to do something resembling a formal decision process. Part 1 of that process is to list requirements without reference to in-place solutions and extant technology. So: without reference to DocBook or any other format, what are the requirements of the system?

Don't get me wrong, I am very open to alternatives but I am not aware of any reliable alternative at the moment.

That's why we need to do requirements determination. Your "reliable" may not be the consensus "reliable" (just for starters). Step 2 will be to figure out what meets the requirements. Wiki might, DocBook might, ReST might, New Silver Bullet X might. But requirements first! DocBook is not a "requirement", it is a technology solution, same as Wiki or anything else. Among other things, what tasks does the documentation system need to handle? Is the list I proposed earlier sufficient? Does it detail items that are not needed? -- Paul M. Jones Savant: the simple alternative to Smarty. http://phpsavant.com/