From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Ring To: "'docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com'" Subject: RE: I'm trying to set up docbook-tools... Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 02:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: X-SW-Source: 2000-q3/msg00041.html Message-ID: <20000707022700.GKsRdfnUu7msTpGG3QJjN9QOisJWH89vL-V3MlNBz34@z> A few minutes searching might pop up some immediately useful "Getting started with DocBook"-type documents. Useful for those that just need to get things done, as well as those who wants to make SGML and DocBook more palatable. Try for instance these: A Practical Introduction to DocBook http://www.oswg.org/oswg-nightly/oswg/en_US.ISO_8859-1/articles/DocBook -Intro/docbook-intro/index.html DocBook HOWTO http://metalab.unc.edu/godoy/using-docbook/using-docbook.html Practical information about the use of SGML/XML and DocBook on Debian http://www.debian.org/~bortz/SGML-HOWTO/potato/howto.html Practical information about the use of SGML/XML and DocBook on WindowsNT http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/ntsgml.html A fairly complete guide to O'Reilly's DocBook based production system http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/crism/dsssl/orastyle/index.html I've got many more if you care ... I can't see how whining about the esoteric SGML community can be justified (see link above). I can't see how blaming a single person (Norman Walsh) for the lack of shrink-wrapped SGML and DocBook tools can be justified. SGML is no more a holy grail than C++ or Lisp, and about as immediately useful (that is to say, useless). DocBook is about as immediately useful as STL (that is to say, useless). If you disagree, reflect for a moment just how much prior knowledge and experience is needed before these tools become productive. Now of course, it has become a lot easier to use C++ and STL during the years, easy installation, integrated development environments, tutorials, etc. etc. It takes time and the contributions of a lot of people. Why should SGML and DocBook be any different? Kind regards, Peter Ring