From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Norman Walsh To: Peter Toft Cc: Subject: Re: Where, what and how - The future of DocBook Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 06:36:00 -0000 Message-id: <87ofyse10q.fsf@nwalsh.com> References: X-SW-Source: 2000/msg00406.html | Fine - which tools are available for writing | SGML/DocBook on Linux+xBSD or Windows? The future is XML, not SGML. | - Emacs and alike tools? Naturally. | - Any WYSIWYG editors? That said, for Windows there are lots of XML editing tools coming online. For production environments, I would recommend Arbortext's Epic (disclaimer: I used to work for them). SoftQuad's XMetaL is less expensive. | - Any *fast* syntax verification system James Clark's SP. | - and what is being made in general What is being made of what in general? | Many companies don't accept DocBook - why? Many companies do. Bug ones. With lots of documentation: Sun, HP, Novell, etc. Who doesn't accept it (and why do you care that they don't?) | Can't we do better??? I'm sure we can. | What is the future for SGML/DocBook versus XML/DocBook | - again also regarding tools, the work efford going on | at the moment etc. XML is the future. But since XML is SGML, there's no loss here. You can continue to use your favorite SGML tools. But I don't expect any more SGML tools to be written. Ever. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh | We dance around in a ring and suppose, http://nwalsh.com/ | but the Secret sits in the middle and | knows.--Robert Frost From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Norman Walsh To: Peter Toft Cc: Subject: Re: Where, what and how - The future of DocBook Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 06:08:00 -0000 Message-ID: <87ofyse10q.fsf@nwalsh.com> References: X-SW-Source: 2000-q4/msg00047.html Message-ID: <20001204060800.-kQ23gZmX8U4qW_x_C7vrJp5txV0D3k6TC8SFu_2S7Q@z> | Fine - which tools are available for writing | SGML/DocBook on Linux+xBSD or Windows? The future is XML, not SGML. | - Emacs and alike tools? Naturally. | - Any WYSIWYG editors? That said, for Windows there are lots of XML editing tools coming online. For production environments, I would recommend Arbortext's Epic (disclaimer: I used to work for them). SoftQuad's XMetaL is less expensive. | - Any *fast* syntax verification system James Clark's SP. | - and what is being made in general What is being made of what in general? | Many companies don't accept DocBook - why? Many companies do. Bug ones. With lots of documentation: Sun, HP, Novell, etc. Who doesn't accept it (and why do you care that they don't?) | Can't we do better??? I'm sure we can. | What is the future for SGML/DocBook versus XML/DocBook | - again also regarding tools, the work efford going on | at the moment etc. XML is the future. But since XML is SGML, there's no loss here. You can continue to use your favorite SGML tools. But I don't expect any more SGML tools to be written. Ever. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh | We dance around in a ring and suppose, http://nwalsh.com/ | but the Secret sits in the middle and | knows.--Robert Frost