Re: [boost] Re: Boost Documentation [was Iterator Adaptors]

From: npguy (npguy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-12 02:34:29

sorry for OT question.

Can you recommend me any Visual XML editor?

>From: Jeremy Siek <jsiek_at_[hidden]>
>Reply-To: boost_at_[hidden]
>To: boost_at_[hidden]
>Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Boost Documentation [was Iterator Adaptors]
>Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 12:40:18 -0500 (EST)
>
>
>I'm definitely in favor of going in the XML direction with boost
>documentation. My group at ND has been looking at using XML to create
>"concept" descriptions, which are the basis of many forms of output: html
>docs, latex docs, C++ concept checking classes.
>
>Here's a few random thoughts on the subject:
>
>1. The power of XML is in the ability to create *new* DTD's and define the
>semantic information contained... and how that should be mapped to other
>DTD's.
>
>2. Content should be separated from display, i.e. the xml tags used in a
>document should describe *what* the content is, not *how* it should be
>displayed. A separate stylesheet is then used to map the content-oriented
>tags to the display-oriented tags. Hence, I envision boost docs having
>their own DTD's, and then we will have a set of XSL stylesheets to convert
>these to various other formats.
>
>3. Writing C++ code inside of an XML document is not easy due to the "<"
>and ">" issues. I've been thinking about creating an alternative syntax
>for XML that uses symbols other than "<" and ">", perhaps "@<" and "@>". A
>simple translator could then convert our alternate-xml into real xml,
>converting "<" to "&lt;" and "@<" to "<".
>
>4. XSL is good for *simple* transformations of XML documents... but it is
>extremely verbose, and pure functional, which makes more complex
>transformations hard to program. It would be nice to be able to write the
>transformations in C++ instead. Perhaps we should define a generic "Tree"
>concept, and write wrappers for some existing DOM implementation like
>Xalan.
>
>5. It should be possible to do "literate programming" in XML. I've been
>experimenting with this for our BGL book. One extremely handy technique is
>to specify preconditions/postconditions in the docs using real C++
>expressions, and then suck these expressions directly into the real test
>code.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Jeremy
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Jeremy Siek                        www: http://www.lsc.nd.edu/~jsiek/
>  Ph.D. Candidate                  email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
>  Univ. of Notre Dame         work phone: [phone]
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.