Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Query regarding boostbook and documentation
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-01-05 00:57:05
On 04.01.2016 19:50, Robert Ramey wrote:
> On 1/4/16 2:54 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>> On 04.01.2016 11:11, Robert Ramey wrote:
>>> On 1/4/16 5:04 AM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>>>> On 04.01.2016 01:35, Robert Ramey wrote:
>>>>> On 1/3/16 4:02 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>>>>>> I know this isn't what Boost itself is using right now. Hopefully,
>>>>>> the above is completed, Boost may switch to free itself from
>>>>>> having to
>>>>>> maintain yet another home-grown tool / language.
>>>>> what does thie mean exactly?
>>>> It means that - ideally - the document schema (and tools) now known as
>>>> "BoostBook" should become part of DocBook,
>>> You mean you're going to enhance DocBook so that it incorporates tags
>>> from BoostBook? I don't think you mean that.
>> Why not ? (To be perfectly clear, I'm not proposing to augment the
>> DocBook 5 "core" vocabulary with the BoostBook tags. But since DocBook 5
>> already uses namespaces, it's easy to simply put this new vocabulary
>> into its own namespace, as a "DocBook 5 profile" (or "extension"). And
>> in fact, that's exactly what the previous GSoC work did.
> Maybe I've mis-understood. If you mean you create a new schema for
> BoostBook which includes DocBook5 - just like BoostBook currently
> includes DocBook4 - I see no problem. I still can't imagine you're
> going to edit DocBook5 itself.
Just have a look at the RNG schema that I referred to in my initial mail:
Yes, it is an extension of DB5. It lives in a separate namespace, and
doesn't require the original DB5 schema to be modified.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC