[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Quote about DocBook

[Grant Johnson]

While I find myself agreeing with the structure argument for docbook,
I feel the need to say that there needs to be an easy point of entry for programmers and "writers"

This might help... And standard templates can then be published and shared.

http://xml.openoffice.org/xmerge/docbook/UserGuide.html 

-- 

F. Grant Johnson
  Systems Coordinator
  Robertson Library
  University of Prince Edward Island

>>> On 5/15/2009 at 9:10 AM, in message
<e28b6dac0905150510m1ab2735du7e3010edceab96e5 at mail.gmail.com>, Karen Schneider
<kgs at esilibrary.com> wrote:
> Since last fall I've been lurking on discussion lists for open-source
> documentation projects (e.g. Fedora), open source standards such as DocBook,
> and tool-specific lists such as oXygen XML editor. The following quote, from
> someone involved in a major open source project, sums up the assessment I
> get from people who have spoken with me about DocBook:
> 
> "The reason why DocBook is the tool of choice is because it gets the job
> done and everything else is worse.  [Most of] the tools are free software.
>  You get the output formats you need: HTML, HTML Help (for Windows),
> tolerable print, man pages, plain text.  It's easy to work with for a
> decentralized team because the sources are plain text that you can check
> into CVS.
> 
> "Everything else is worse: Wikis are only online.  Word is just a terrible
> tool altogether, and you can't run cvs diff on it.  LaTeX is weird, so is
> Texinfo.  Everything else is either very limited or unfinished or
> nonexistent."