Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F97475AAC for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:14:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from joeconway.com (unknown [63.210.180.150]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6498474E53 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 18:14:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.5.3] (account jconway HELO joeconway.com) by joeconway.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) with ESMTP-TLS id 1499623; Thu, 02 Jan 2003 15:47:44 -0800 Message-ID: <3E14C75A.90700@joeconway.com> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 15:12:26 -0800 From: Joe Conway User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2) Gecko/20021126 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Eisentraut Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Documentation in book length References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200301/2 X-Sequence-Number: 1602 Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I know one possible objection is that it takes too long to build the > complete documentation set. But you can do an SGML syntax check that > takes a few seconds on modern machines and catches most mistakes. That sounds great. How to you do the SGML syntax check? > Compared to making the documentation easier to use and more "marketable" I > think this is a price we have to pay. > > Thoughts? Making the docs into one book should also allow better hyperlink cross-referencing. That will be a welcome improvement. Joe