Re: [boost] Boost documentation

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-02 05:12:42

Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> on Sun Jun 24 2007, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>>> on Sat Jun 23 2007, "Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental-AT-thomson.com> wrote:
>>>>> There several WYSWYG editors producing DocBook (and I don't need to
>>>>> enter markup at all!) and this trend is going to grow.
>>>> Yeah, but we need to represent semantic information (e.g. Concepts)
>>>> that are outside the builtin representational abilities of DocBook.
>>> DocBook is designed for extensibility. 
>> I know.  That's why I said *builtin*.
>>
>> BoostBook is just an extension of DocBook, using expressly-designed
>> hooks in DocBook for that purpose.  I don't consider that an NIH move
>> on our part; quite the contrary.
> 
> Yes, understood. With NIH I'm not referring to BoostBook, but to QuickBook,
> which is neither an extension to DocBook, nor ReST. Thus, no existing
> parser will work with it, no existing documentation will help, and no
> existing community can answer questions and help resolve issues.

I don't understand what you mean by "no existing". There is
an existing parser, there is an existing documentation and
there is an existing community. It just so happens that it
is within the boost community.

FWIW, QuickDoc/QuickBook was written in 2001. I wasn't aware of any
similar tool. ReST was far from my radar screen. ReST was
completed (according to the docs [http://tinyurl.com/2kthnf]) in
2001-2002. So, it is not NIH that drove me to write it, if your
definition of NIH is (http://tinyurl.com/7oavz) "a persistent
sociological, corporate or institutional culture that avoids using
already existing products, research or knowledge because of its
different origins."

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net