Re: [boost] Reference documentation: one approach

From: William E. Kempf (wekempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-29 16:16:47

Douglas Gregor said:
> On Tuesday 29 October 2002 10:43 am, Peter Simons wrote:
>> Douglas Gregor writes:
>> Also, DocBook is extensible; if you find that tags are missing, just
>> define them. Or report them to the guys at docbook.org: They are very
>> cooperative and certainly value input from their users. This would
>> also be beneficial to many more people than just "Boosters'.
>
> I wouldn't expect the guys at docbook.org to understand what we need for
> Boost  documentation, so we're probably (mostly) on our own if we want
> to extend  DocBook for Boost.

Except our needs coincide with the needs of the C++ standards committee
and most C++ developers, so I wouldn't be too surprised if they weren't
interested in some collaboration if it's actually needed.  Of course, I'm
just guessing ;).

-- 
William E. Kempf