Re: [Boost-docs] How was the documentation built, compiled from some source format or written in HTML?

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] How was the documentation built, compiled from some source format or written in HTML?
From: xiaq (xiaqqaix_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-30 22:36:43

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 3:51 AM, Daniel James <daniel_james_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 30/07/2008, xiaq <xiaqqaix_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>   I'm a member of a boost documentation translation team, and I wanted
>>  to figure out how the original boost documentation was built. It seems
>>  that they were written in HTML by hand 'cause some parts of the
>>  documentation have different stylesheets.
>
> Different libraries write their documentation in different ways. Some
> use handwritten html. Some use boostbook, which is an extended version
> of docbook. Some use quickbook which is a wiki-like documentation
> format which translates to boostbook (quickbook documentation
> generally has a '.qbk' extension). Doxygen is also used by several
> libraries for generating their reference documentation. And there's a
> few libraries which use python docutils (the source has an .rst
> extension).
>
> The documentation source is usually stored in the libraries' 'doc'
> directory, e.g. for iostreams you can find hand-written html at
> 'libs/iostreams/doc'. And if the documentation needs to built there
> should a Jamfile containing the build instructions.
>
> Building documentation can be complicated. So if you want to work on a
> particular library, ask about it here and we'll try to help you get
> started.

Thanks a lot. I'll ask later if I have other problems.