Stefan Seefeld wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
on Sun Jun 24 2007, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
There several WYSWYG editors producing DocBook (and I don't need to enter markup at all!) and this trend is going to grow. Yeah, but we need to represent semantic information (e.g. Concepts)
on Sat Jun 23 2007, "Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental-AT-thomson.com> wrote: that are outside the builtin representational abilities of DocBook. DocBook is designed for extensibility. I know. That's why I said *builtin*.
BoostBook is just an extension of DocBook, using expressly-designed hooks in DocBook for that purpose. I don't consider that an NIH move on our part; quite the contrary.
Yes, understood. With NIH I'm not referring to BoostBook, but to QuickBook, which is neither an extension to DocBook, nor ReST. Thus, no existing parser will work with it, no existing documentation will help, and no existing community can answer questions and help resolve issues.
I don't understand what you mean by "no existing". There is an existing parser, there is an existing documentation and there is an existing community. It just so happens that it is within the boost community. FWIW, QuickDoc/QuickBook was written in 2001. I wasn't aware of any similar tool. ReST was far from my radar screen. ReST was completed (according to the docs [http://tinyurl.com/2kthnf]) in 2001-2002. So, it is not NIH that drove me to write it, if your definition of NIH is (http://tinyurl.com/7oavz) "a persistent sociological, corporate or institutional culture that avoids using already existing products, research or knowledge because of its different origins." Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net