From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-24 03:34:19
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> "Joel de Guzman" <joel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>> I. quickbook as documentation media.
>> And it *is* easy to support.
> It's easy now, when you've got very limited number of users. This will
> change with widespread application of this format. And to be completely
> frank with you how easy it is to support the tools for you is comparatively
> minor part of my concern. After all it's your own decision. The fact
> remains: someone need to support it. Someone need to test it. Someone need
> to documents it.
So what? All tools need documentation and support. It just so happens
that this tool is homegrown. You can argue that we are not in this
business. Fine. That's your opinion. I find Quickbook useful. I will
continue to support it. Many more find it useful too. I'm glad to be
of service. It just so happens that I am a booster, but I would have
done the same even if I was an outsider, if boost finds my tool useful.
> And what about these:
> Do you support quickbook documents validation?
Does a car have wings?
> Do you plan to invent schema language?
Does a bike have turbo-chargers?
> Do you run unit tests?
Oh man, sure we do!
> How flexible is it in comparison with DocBook from extension standpoint?
Gennadiy, you are clearly missing the point of what quickbook is.
I do not want to argue this any longer.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk