| Re: [AD] Re: [AL] allegro DTD |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
- To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [AD] Re: [AL] allegro DTD
- From: Elias Pschernig <allefant@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 09:57:22 +0100
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=nn60sAeOrgE8A/J9rbw70jpbi4HL4xdQuKQP3yydZpD15YFiAhPfmpbAyQuBsmePQXkSVaqtM1xRTqX/aN6D0YzzJBdoSrPhd+JPedMGHmKyXV/PMWTMVcGClCKXQfLJMTyHWyocAwKXAlaGkBnODjZCJ4OLtr7zSJ8UDRrK2XY=
> So to build the documentation, the end user / programmer would have to
> have perl to build the non ._tx formats?
Well, for that, and espically for converting the XML into the output
formats, some tool(s) will be needed. On the A5 list, the plan seems
to have been to first use XSLT/python/perl/PHP, and then convert to C.
Personally, I'm not too sure. We could just distribute html docs with
distributions, and require CVS users to have XSLT (and maybe perl).
>
> I would like having the base docs in XML. It's an easy to read format,
> most tags are self-explanatory, and it can be converted into another
> format just as easilly as a new _tx format.
>
> This is also one of the reasons XML exists, isn't it? A universal way to
> store data. Why create a new _tx format when there's already a good
> replacement to the current _tx?
>
> IMO, the new ._tx format should just be .xml(.gz).
>
Well, we could always drop the new tx. Personally, I find xml
completely uneditable (without an XML editor). And the new tx should
be like a wiki format, very easily editable in any ASCII editor - so
there shold be no concern's because of the current _tx format, we
hopefully can remove all the things that made it hard to edit.