Re: [AD] Re: [AL] allegro DTD

[Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Elias Pschernig wrote:

> The main advantage I see with having the XML stage is, that the thing is
> modifieable again, as opposed to makedoc.c, on which I hacked many hours
> just to realize many more would be needed to create certain things with
> it :P (e.g. proper PDF output).
>
> The new _tx format should be a lot simpler and improved compared to the
> old. It will not contain any output format specifics (which is half of
> the commands in the old), and allow arbitrary nesting of sections. And,
> direct parsing of it should never be necessary, since there's the
> utility to convert it to XML, which everything else can with 0-cost
> parsing :)

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).