[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Question about bug 8206

From: Miles Bader
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Question about bug 8206
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 10:51:34 +0900

"Mark A. Flacy" <address@hidden> writes:
> Miles> I've never written a document in docbook, but for the same
> Miles> reason it looks like pure drudgery to write if you're not using
> Miles> rather heavy editor magic.
> I have.  I've never written a texinfo document (at all) but I cannot
> imagine that to be an improvement over docbook.

It's certainly far more _readable_ as source than docbook.  Much of this
is simple brevity, which incidentally helps authors too.

> Miles> I would never consider docbook an acceptable source form as
> Miles> long as people expect to able to reasonably edit the sources as
> Miles> raw text.
> A vanishingly small number of potential markup languages fit that bill.

Actually many do:  texinfo, scribe, latex (slightly less obvious because
of the weird quirks latex inherits from tex, but still, simple latex is,
well, simple, and readable).  It is more common in "classic" markup
languages, I suppose partly because more people use magic editors these
days instead of plain text markup languages, and partly because the
xml/sgml disease has spread recently.

Come now, if we were really planning to harm you, would we be waiting here,
 beside the path, in the very darkest part of the forest?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]