On 6/24/07, David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote:
on Sat Jun 23 2007, "Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental-AT-thomson.com> wrote:
Hi,
5. This is new *nonstandard* format any new developer will have to learn. I don't believe we can afford yet another barrier for new submitters.
Unless they already know DocBook, DocBook represents a much higher barrier for most people getting started.
Totally agree.
6. Source code highlighting
My understanding is that quickbook presents some source code highlighting automation. IMO this can be either implemented as standalone C++ based tool that docs writers can use when required or even better it can be implemented in JavaScript. I believe I've seen it done.
I'm not sure I want to do that job on the browser, but I understand the appeal, especially if end-users can tune the colors.
Have you seen this: (firefox, safari, camino and knoqueror only for now) http://tinyurl.com/27ubvp Move the mouse to the upper-right corner of a code-block and select your preferred IDE.
II. BoostBook 4. Documentation I found documentation to be largely unacceptable (funny thing for the project dedicated to writing documentation)
c) most critical: no description whatsoever of all the modification done in comparison with DocBook. All the updated parameter need to be listed, all the updated templates need to be explained. General approach should be what the person familiar with DocBook (standard) need to know/expect to use BoostBook
That's a problem.
Almost solved in my local copy, will upload it soon.
As I mentioned before we should try to limit our extensions to the most necessary only and strive to stick with standard DocBook. Also all extensions should be made optional.
Aren't they, currently?
Yep.
III. What should we do?
IMO the standardization efforts need to target DocBook/BoostBook. On the other hand each developer should be allowed to extend/twick standard L&F. Usually differences should be only cosmetic.
Major cosmetic differences will keep Boost looking fractured.
100% agree.
Following are general observations about common L&F
1. JS Menu support. I believe it should be implemented but made optional.
Why not just let the user show/hide it?
I am working to provide this functionality. You have spoiled the surprise effect now ;)
4. Portability This is major requirement for all the features we implement. They should work on at least set of predefined "major" browsers.
Yep.
We are currently working on this. Best regards Matias Capeletto