Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
Hi,
I've been offline for a bit. But I was able to spend several weeks learning DocBook. I must say I was really impressed with quality of this project. I also tried to get a grasp of BoostBook and gave perfunctory look on quickbook. Here I would like to share my thoughts on recent "doc update" movement.
I. quickbook as documentation media.
Why, oh, why don't we learn from our own mistakes. We just started to realize the problem we got ourselves into with makesystem. And immediately find new toy to play with. However fun it is, however cool it might look on first sight, THIS IS NOT OUR BUSENESS to invent/support documentation format.
It is my business :-). As much as I like writing libraries, I also like writing tools. And it *is* easy to support. It is merely a very thin layer on top of docbook. It is very easy to understand, extend and maintain. I am not the sole maintainer. It's being maintained by some folks and I do get some contributions from a few more. IOTW, it's not a one-man-show. And, it is not a new toy. It's been with us since 2002.
DocBook is very mature, well supported project. It's based on widely accepted/supported technologies. It's powerful and configurable to implement essentially anything one need.
quickbook *is* docbook. What's the worry? If you get paranoid, you can just dump into xml and forget about quickbook. Nothing lost!
I personally don't see much valid reasons to look in home grown format direction.
Well, you can't please everybody ;) The good thing is, you don't need to use it if you don't want to. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net