Message-ID: <002001c37a53$b1e3b3b0$152ca8c0@visiomode1>
Reply-To: <ilkka@visiomode.com>
From: <ilkka@visiomode.com>
To: <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
References: <200309080300.h88305423501@candle.pha.pa.us>
	<200309080926.43872.darko.prenosil@finteh.hr>
	<002601c3764d$34e68db0$152ca8c0@visiomode1>
	<60he3n5682.fsf@dev6.int.libertyrms.info>
	<001401c3773e$48634990$152ca8c0@visiomode1>
	<m3brtswfha.fsf@chvatal.cbbrowne.com>
Subject: Re: Windows CHM format for the documents
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 03:03:51 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> - The current usage allows people to work on documents as files, using
>   whatever editing tools they like.  With your "server software," that
>   is lost.

Yes, it is harder to use any tool for editing (though not
impossible,copy/paste could be used :-).

There are benefits from using the same tool too - the output will probably
look the same throughout the document. The central server idea emphasizes
this even more I think ... and the programmatically (sp?) :-)

> - Current usage uses CVS to manage changes.  This allows changes to be
>   looked at and approved/rejected/modified.  I haven't any idea if
>   your system uses text files in behind, it sounds like not.

Creating some of the CVS features wouldn't be a problem at all. For example
storing certain situations (labeling) would be a good idea (of course the
current backuping could be used for this as well).

> - Current usage does not mandate that anyone have a synchronous
>   connection to a central server that becomes bottleneck / vulnerable
>   point.

Yes, well, nowadays most people have fixed lines (in the future more so), I
wouldn't count this a big drawback.

> The apparent "benefit" of your tool is that it provides a tool with a
> user interface that slavishly follows the Windows "CHM file" viewer.
> That may be an advantage to those that want to slavishly follow
> Windows development/deployment "standards," but I daresay you're NOT
> in a community that is particularly interested in that sort of thing.

I'm far away from favoring any particular OS. Personally I have done more
Unix/Linux development than Windows. But as long as this shouldn't be an OS
war forum, I think all OSs pretty much suck at some things, and are good at
others.

CHM is only one choice for output, and besides it's not only for Windows.
http://xchm.sourceforge.net/ there's a CHM viewer for Linux. There are more
similar kinds of viewers with slightly different file format, but they do
the same. I think that CHM has its advantages and I like using them.

I'm fine if you want to use your tools, and sorry if I bothered you...It was
just an option that I presented and you have given some good feedback of it.

Ilkka