From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Message-Id: <200511151404.jAFE44Q21489@candle.pha.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [DOCS] 8.1 PDF Documentation.
In-Reply-To: <20051115112341.GC25699@surnet.cl>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:04:04 -0500 (EST)
CC: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>,
	David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, pgsql-www@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > I am still unclear why there is no more reliable SGML toolchain for PDF
> > output after all these years.  Seems things have improved because we now
> > have bookmarks, but still, why is this functionality not more mainstream.
> 
> There is no SGML toolchain because SGML has been abandoned as the
> DocBook markup language.  The toolchain that everybody else uses is
> based on XML DocBook.  It has been proposed that we abandon SGML and
> jump to XML, but the idea has been shot down.  And it's possible to
> convert our SGML to XML automatically and process it with the newer
> toolchain.

OK, that makes sense.  We went from LaTeX to SGML long ago with the idea
that we could easily generate any output format, but that promise has
never been fully realized.

Could the SGML be automatically converted to XML during the print
process and then converted to PDF?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073