Subject: Re: [boost] Do we need BoostBook?
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-06 01:54:10
On 12/06/2014 02:41 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> Vladimir Prus-3 wrote
>> As heretic as it sounds, do we get any benefits from BoostBook? It's a
>> complex vocabulary, with complex toolchain,
>> and while PDF generation sounded nice 10 years ago, printing HTML into PDF
>> is a viable option these days - and nobody
>> would want to print entire Boost documentation anyway?
> Usage of BoostBook/DocBook isn't required by Boost. Library writers are
> free to use any system they want to produce HTML documentation.
> Maybe the question you might want to ask is ... Should QuickBook be altered
> to produce html directly?
QuickBook, likewise, is not required. So the question I really want to ask is what
people's opinion about best documentation solution in 2014. It's intentionally
-- Vladimir Prus CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded http://vladimirprus.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk