Re: [boost] Improving Boost Docs

Subject: Re: [boost] Improving Boost Docs
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-08-14 17:56:11

AMDG

On 08/14/2017 11:37 AM, John Maddock via Boost wrote:
> 
> If you want a different look and feel, then yes things could be a lot
> better.  However, within boost the consistency is a good thing IMO.
> 
> BTW the look and feel is in 2 parts:
> 
> * Different stylesheet, fluorescent dancing C++ keywords etc.... this is
> actually trivial to do.
> * Different Docbook customisation layer (and yes there are some
> formatting options that can only be addressed in XSL, not in XSL
> params).  This is the hard one - or at least its the hard one if we're
> using Jamfiles.  From the command line it's trivial if you don't mind
> writing a... ahem... makefile ;)
> 
> BTW is there any reason to continue using the Boostbook customisation
> layer?  Is anyone actually using it?

  Yes.  Nobody writes it directly, but there's a
stylesheet that converts doxygen's XML output
into BoostBook.

>  I'm fairly sure quickbook doesn't,
> and it would sure simplify the build process to leave out one level of
> XSL transformation.  Sadly we would need an XSL expert to sort that mess
> out I suspect :(
> 

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe