DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2003-09
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Documentation Mailing Lists and Newgroups

From: mark@xxxxxxxxxx (Mark Valentine)
Date: 04 Sep 2003 08:37:06 GMT

In article <1062611340.887653@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Sander Vesik  <sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Mark Valentine <mark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In article <1062437965.492707@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Sander Vesik  <sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>DocBook XML is "basicly" the same as BocBook SGML, with some very
>>>minor differences.
>> Well, it seems to me that those <em/minor/ differences might just make the
>> extremely noisy markup syntax a little more bearable (though it's true that
>> they probably don't really help readability very much after all)...
>Just to clarify - the differences between the xml and sgml versions are that
>some exclusions present in teh sgml version aren't in the xml version 
>(because xml doesn't have exclusions). The amrkup tags and attributes are 
>teh same. 

I was trying to point out the syntactical differences, e.g. in XML you need
<em>minor</em> rather than <em/minor/ or even <em>minor</> (of course it makes
a lot more difference with the longer tag names typical in DocBook)...

For example, FreeBSD's man-refs.ent uses SGML short tags and the syntax is
already too verbose:


In XML this becomes:


That's a painful way to say "awk(1)"!  (It's ".Xr awk 1" in mdoc, for example.)

Although I do make use of exclusions currently, I could probably do the same
job just using attributes (but not if I have to customise DocBook XML heavily
to add my own attributes - I haven't looked yet to see how likely this might


"Tigers will do ANYTHING for a tuna fish sandwich."
"We're kind of stupid that way."   *munch* *munch*
  -- <http://www.calvinandhobbes.com>

[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]