Subject: Re: Switching to XML
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
To: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org, David Blewett <david@dawninglight.net>
In-Reply-To: <457A71F8.6070001@lelarge.info>
References: <4579720E.4000707@dawninglight.net>
	<200612082115.53566.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<1165609294.24745.19.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<200612082158.06649.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<1165613160.24745.36.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<457A71F8.6070001@lelarge.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2006 21:27:25 -0800
Message-Id: <1165728445.13210.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Sat, 2006-12-09 at 09:21 +0100, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake a écrit :
> > On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 21:58 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>> You can create, edit, convert, save, and open docbook xml in
> >>> OpenOfice.org.
> >> Sure, there are more editing options with DocBook XML.  No one disputes 
> >> that.  But the question at hand was about processing the DocBook.
> > 
> > Yes which is generated from our use of SGML which is the core of this
> > problem and the core of the question as a whole.
> > 
> > SGML is making working with the documentation *harder*.
> > 
> 
> +1

I believe this point is being overlooked is people's willingness to code
a solution ;).

Guillaume could you please tell us *why* you ported the SGML to XML
before doing your translation and processing? Perhaps that will carry
more weight to this discussion then my hand waving.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


-- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate