From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-20 12:07:33
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 19:59 +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > I would strongly advise that everything go into Quickbook format. It's
> > far easier to write documentation in Quickbook than Boostbook, and
> > Quickbook gives us more options.
> What options? Since you've authored Boostbook you must know better,
> but I still don't see the value in using home-grown documentation format.
The option to eliminate BoostBook entirely, so that one can translate
directly from Quickbook to Docbook.
I'm making the assumption that it's better to have something home-grown
but simple (Quickbook) rather than something loosely standards-based
(extends DocBook) that is hard to use.
I may have built BoostBook, but I write everything with Quickbook
+Doxygen nowadays. Those two work very well together as the user-level
interface to the documentation toolchain; BoostBook and its XSL is
really just an inconvenient intermediate format right now.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk