* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` was something else - now SGML and XML David Mason ` (4 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss < 200002231510.KAA30278@devserv.devel.redhat.com > < 38B3FF81.40E6F034@cybercable.tm.fr > X-URL: < http://www.redhat.com > From: "David C. Mason" <dcm@redhat.com> Date: 23 Feb 2000 10:52:21 -0500 Message-ID: <y9xwvnvzzka.fsf@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Lines: 25 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> writes: > Stop, stop, stop, I don't want to start no flame war. Not my intention - why does everyone think I am angry at them this week? Jeez. When you say the scripts are unmaintained I think you are wrong. Mark is the maintainer of DocBook Tools - DocBook Tools include those scripts. Instead of announcing you are going to maintain those scripts, why not ask Marks if you can send some patches to him or get cvs access to make some changes. You can see by the number of people already asking you for tarballs that this can cause a split in the project. I'd like to see more concentration on this project AND some new projects that do things differently. I would not like to see a project splinter and confuse. That is just my opinion. Again, I am not flaming you, I am not upset at you, in fact, throughout our conversations over the year - I like you.. I too want to see changes made to the scripts - hell I hack them up on my own machine and ignore the ones that ship anyway. Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss David Mason wrote: > When you say the scripts are unmaintained I think you are wrong. Mark > is the maintainer of DocBook Tools - DocBook Tools include those > scripts. Well, it's what I have been reading in all docbook tool packages. And when I have been proposing a patch to db2ps to make it work with alternate stylesheets, I never had any answer, but maybe Mark was too busy to integrate this patch. > Instead of announcing you are going to maintain those > scripts, why not ask Marks if you can send some patches to him or get > cvs access to make some changes. You can see by the number of people Done. I've been asking this directly to Mark a few weeks ago. Again, no answer. Mark may be on holliday, though. I did not want to make my projects public, because I wanted to hear Mark's opinion before, but people were wondering what existed as docbook tools, and some were starting to say that they did not use them. I don't think that CVS concurrent access for me would be a good idea, because the changes are too radical to be done without approval from Mark. > already asking you for tarballs that this can cause a split in the > project. I'd like to see more concentration on this project AND some > new projects that do things differently. I would not like to see a > project splinter and confuse. That is just my opinion. You're perfectly right. > Again, I am not flaming you, I am not upset at you, in fact, > throughout our conversations over the year - I like you.. I too want I love you too. Kiss me ;-) > to see changes made to the scripts - hell I hack them up on my own > machine and ignore the ones that ship anyway. I just tried to do something simple, clean and robust that would need less hacking. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: was something else - now SGML and XML [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason ` (3 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Norman Walsh; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss < 200002231540.KAA08528@devserv.devel.redhat.com > < 7453-Wed23Feb2000110215-0500-ndw@nwalsh.com > X-URL: < http://www.redhat.com > From: "David C. Mason" <dcm@redhat.com> Date: 23 Feb 2000 11:43:04 -0500 Message-ID: <y9xk8jv3m5j.fsf@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Lines: 12 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes: > If you're referring to IE5 support for XSL, it's so badly broken > that it's just about useless. (Worse than useless, in fact.) Is that true - I, obviously, don't use IE but I see a lot of traffic on the DocBook lists from people who do and despite the fact that they are usually trying to work around some problem - there sure seems to be a lot of people using it. Is that true or am I trapped in a good marketing scheme? Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: was something else - now SGML and XML 2000-12-27 6:36 ` was something else - now SGML and XML David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Norman Walsh @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Mason; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss / David Mason <dcm@redhat.com> was heard to say: | > If you're referring to IE5 support for XSL, it's so badly broken | > that it's just about useless. (Worse than useless, in fact.) | | Is that true - I, obviously, don't use IE but I see a lot of traffic on | the DocBook lists from people who do and despite the fact that they Which lists? | are usually trying to work around some problem - there sure seems to | be a lot of people using it. Is that true or am I trapped in a good | marketing scheme? It doesn't support <xsl:number>, or variables, or named templates, or a half a dozen other things. I've toyed with XSL stylesheets for sdocbook, but you can't even number footnotes or sections fer cryin' out loud. I'm sure there are lots of people trying to use it, and they've got my sympathy. If you're doing server-side stuff with tabular XML data extracted from some database and your injecting it into HTML coded in some other tool, it probably does some job fairly well. But that's not a job I have to do, thank goodness! Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Curiosity never killed anything http://nwalsh.com/ | except maybe a few hours. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: was something else - now SGML and XML [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` was something else - now SGML and XML David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason ` (2 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Norman Walsh; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss < 200002231540.KAA08528@devserv.devel.redhat.com > < 7453-Wed23Feb2000110215-0500-ndw@nwalsh.com > X-URL: < http://www.redhat.com > From: "David C. Mason" <dcm@redhat.com> Date: 23 Feb 2000 11:26:42 -0500 Message-ID: <y9xu2izzxz1.fsf@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Lines: 52 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes: > There are some authoring changes (system identifiers, empty tag > syntax, etc.), but the only thing the tools have to do > differently is pass an appropriate SGML declaration to, e.g., > Jade. Like I said - this is true. I know that. But something like empty tag syntax is something that will affect the writer when then finally change the heading on their doc and wonder why the hell it gets errors. The problem is not that I can't handle the changes coming or work around the available tools to work with XML - I can - but the new contributor to the doc project I work on who happens to have come from the Word Processor world and just can't quite grasp this stuff needs a little more help than what jade and XT provide. And to try to merge someone who is willing to help through changes like you mention above sometimes means losing that volunteer. I spend most of my time figuring out how to keep them around and not scare them off. DocBook itself sometimes scares them off without even trying it out. > I'm doing everything I do with XML using Jade and XT. Well, > except for editing which I sometimes use, um, Arbortext products > for, no surprise, and they aren't available for Linux (more's > the pity) but they sure are available for Unix. When is that port coming anyway? ;) > I'll save some of my wilder theories for a chat over a beer some > night, but the simpler answer is that the new tools are coming > along because XML is easier to process than SGML. XML is mostly > marketing. > > New tools *don't have to be written*. All your existing SGML > tools work just fine. So the beer I'm up for - but are you telling me that Jade will parse XML against XSL? It doesn't do that and, it won't do that anytime soon as far as I can tell. XT is fine if you want to write code around it to do some parsing testing but its not finished, and like I said - its a new tool being written. Its very similar situation to the introduction of XSL - which, on the surface, appears to be a rewrite of dsssl with < >'s so that people will understand it better (or something). Its introduction is not only stealing away from the work done on dsssl tools, but as you say yourself "They would also work just fine with the straight DocBook DTD, but I'm not aware of any XSL processors that parse SGML documents." - well DocBook XML *is* SGML isnt it? :) Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Horacio MG 5 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss < 20000223085415.B611@ciberia.es > < 38B3ABD6.71623993@cybercable.tm.fr > X-URL: < http://www.redhat.com > From: "David C. Mason" <dcm@redhat.com> Date: 23 Feb 2000 10:10:57 -0500 Message-ID: <y9x900c0xa6.fsf@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Lines: 25 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> writes: > Announcement : > > I have been repackaging completly the DocBook tools and > rewritten all db* utilities. If you name this one "DocBook Tools it will be the third maintained DocBook Tools. Whatever you might think, Mark is still maintaining DBTools unless he states otherwise. Another fellow has written a version for Suse and is using the name, and now you are planning to make changes and use the name. This is just going to cause *great* confusion for the *nix users who want good tools. 'Just grab DocBook Tools' "WHICH ONE!!!" Please consider renaming it unless Mark gives you maintainer or contributor status! Don't misunderstand me either - I say the more tools we have *the better*! In fact, I'd like to see more tools for XML (that aren't java) for the simple reason that once DocBook hits 5.0 it will only be XML. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Norman Walsh @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Mason; +Cc: Eric Bischoff, docbook-tools-discuss / David Mason <dcm@redhat.com> was heard to say: | Don't misunderstand me either - I say the more tools we have *the | better*! In fact, I'd like to see more tools for XML (that aren't | java) for the simple reason that once DocBook hits 5.0 it will only be | XML. While true, I think that's a somewhat misleading statement. DocBook 5.0 will be an XML DTD, but XML *is* SGML, so it will be an SGML DTD as well. :-) Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Reality is what refuses to go away http://nwalsh.com/ | when I stop believing in | it.--Philip K. Dick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Mark Galassi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Mason, docbook-tools-discuss David Mason wrote: > > Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> writes: > > > Announcement : > > > > I have been repackaging completly the DocBook tools and > > rewritten all db* utilities. > > If you name this one "DocBook Tools it will be the third maintained > DocBook Tools. Whatever you might think, Mark is still maintaining > DBTools unless he states otherwise. Another fellow has written a Stop, stop, stop, I don't want to start no flame war. Mark is maintaining the DocBook tools, this is established and I don't want to change that. I was just proposing some enhancements. I am only proposing myself as the maintainer for the db2* scripts which have officially "unmaintained" status. > version for Suse and is using the name, and now you are planning to > make changes and use the name. No, no. I am politely suggesting some changes. > This is just going to cause *great* confusion for the *nix users who > want good tools. 'Just grab DocBook Tools' "WHICH ONE!!!" Quiet, slow down, David. I am precisely proposing some enhancements *here* to avoid another split. > Please consider renaming it unless Mark gives you maintainer or > contributor status! That's it : I just want to contribute. > Don't misunderstand me either - I say the more tools we have *the > better*! In fact, I'd like to see more tools for XML (that aren't > java) for the simple reason that once DocBook hits 5.0 it will only be > XML. No, there's no use to have *more tools* if they do exactly the same thing. Let me sum up things : when I started looking for some docbook packages for the KDE project, inspired by your great work for the Gnome project, David, I had the following opportunities : - grab the many components (jade, the stylesheets, the jadetex macros, the iso entities, etc) in several places. No thanks, collecting mushrooms is only funny when walking outdoors. - use the sgml-tools 2.0. No way, this project has been suspended - use the docbook-tools. Hey, fine ! Mark has already been doing the job ! then we have been using these tools for some time, and run into problems, that we have fixed with patches, and now I'd like to make the others profit of my experience. That's all. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Mark Galassi 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Mark Galassi @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss >> If you name this one "DocBook Tools it will be the third >> maintained DocBook Tools. Whatever you might think, Mark is >> still maintaining DBTools unless he states otherwise. Another >> fellow has written a Eric> Stop, stop, stop, I don't want to start no flame war. Eric> Mark is maintaining the DocBook tools, this is established Eric> and I don't want to change that. I was just proposing some Eric> enhancements. Wow, more deference which I have not been deserving in the last 90 days... Eric> I am only proposing myself as the maintainer for the db2* Eric> scripts which have officially "unmaintained" status. That was a disclaimer that *Cygnus* was not maintaining those tools; sorry about the confusion. I'm getting closer to catching up on the list, and it looks like we are hitting critical mass for the next generation effort, even before I stepped in. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Horacio MG 5 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Norman Walsh; +Cc: Eric Bischoff, docbook-tools-discuss < 200002231510.KAA30278@devserv.devel.redhat.com > < 6289-Wed23Feb2000102546-0500-ndw@nwalsh.com > X-URL: < http://www.redhat.com > From: "David C. Mason" <dcm@redhat.com> Date: 23 Feb 2000 10:40:59 -0500 Message-ID: <y9xzossylis.fsf@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Lines: 38 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes: > / David Mason <dcm@redhat.com> was heard to say: > | Don't misunderstand me either - I say the more tools we have *the > | better*! In fact, I'd like to see more tools for XML (that aren't > | java) for the simple reason that once DocBook hits 5.0 it will > only be > | XML. > > While true, I think that's a somewhat misleading statement. > DocBook 5.0 will be an XML DTD, but XML *is* SGML, so > it will be an SGML DTD as well. :-) While true, ;) XML is becoming more and more its own beast in more ways than one. The simple fact that our current tools don't handle it well makes it *in reality* something different for the poor souls who had to move from starting things off with <!DOCTYPE Book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook V4.0//EN"[]> to <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>. And on the *nix platforms we don't have it as easy as those of you on MS related products as we have no good tools to process XML (IMHO). Sure jade handles it to some extent, even against dsssl, but it doesn't handle XSL... There are a few java based tools available but the java engines for *nix stink thanks to Sun... Someone has threatened to put XSL support in Mozilla but backed down at the last second.. So tell me in my *real world* setting how similar XML is to SGML despite its continual claim that it is merely a 'subset' of SGML. If it was just that why does XSL have to come along? why do new tools have to be written? etc. But despite all that, the thrust of my argument was that I don't want yet another project called DocBook Tools! (which is not a DTD) Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Norman Walsh @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Mason; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss / David Mason <dcm@redhat.com> was heard to say: | > While true, I think that's a somewhat misleading statement. | > DocBook 5.0 will be an XML DTD, but XML *is* SGML, so | > it will be an SGML DTD as well. :-) | | While true, ;) XML is becoming more and more its own beast in more | ways than one. The simple fact that our current tools don't handle it | well makes it *in reality* something different for the poor souls who | had to move from starting things off with <!DOCTYPE Book PUBLIC | "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook V4.0//EN"[]> to <?xml version="1.0" | standalone="no"?>. There are some authoring changes (system identifiers, empty tag syntax, etc.), but the only thing the tools have to do differently is pass an appropriate SGML declaration to, e.g., Jade. | And on the *nix platforms we don't have it as easy as those of you on | MS related products as we have no good tools to process XML | (IMHO). Sure jade handles it to some extent, even against dsssl, but | it doesn't handle XSL... There are a few java based tools available | but the java engines for *nix stink thanks to Sun... Someone has | threatened to put XSL support in Mozilla but backed down at the last | second.. Huh? Jade and the Java based XSL tools ought to be damn near the same. If you're referring to IE5 support for XSL, it's so badly broken that it's just about useless. (Worse than useless, in fact.) I'm doing everything I do with XML using Jade and XT. Well, except for editing which I sometimes use, um, Arbortext products for, no surprise, and they aren't available for Linux (more's the pity) but they sure are available for Unix. | So tell me in my *real world* setting how similar XML is to SGML | despite its continual claim that it is merely a 'subset' of SGML. If | it was just that why does XSL have to come along? why do new tools | have to be written? etc. I'll save some of my wilder theories for a chat over a beer some night, but the simpler answer is that the new tools are coming along because XML is easier to process than SGML. XML is mostly marketing. New tools *don't have to be written*. All your existing SGML tools work just fine. | But despite all that, the thrust of my argument was that I don't want | yet another project called DocBook Tools! (which is not a DTD) I'm staying out of that one. :-) Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Fast. Cheap. Well. Pick two. http://nwalsh.com/ | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Horacio MG 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : " Eric Bischoff 5 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Horacio MG @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 655 bytes --] > I've made some wrappers and a Makefile for dealing with standard > DocBook tools. I'll be packaging them soon (RPM and, of course, > SRPM). I can send them to you. They are commented out in Portuguese, > but when I package them they'll have comments in English and a > "README" :-) Hi, could you send me a tarball of the sources, please? (no rpms) > I don't use Cygnus tools (don't ask me why :-)). I'd like to ask why though. TIA -- Horacio Anno MMDCCLIII aUC homega@ciberia.es Valencia - ESPAÃA -------------------------------------------------------------------- Key fingerprint = F4EE AE5E 2F01 0DB3 62F2 A9F4 AD31 7093 4233 7AE6 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Horacio MG @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : " Eric Bischoff 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Horacio MG; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1355 bytes --] On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 08:54:15AM +0100, Horacio MG wrote: > > I've made some wrappers and a Makefile for dealing with standard > > DocBook tools. I'll be packaging them soon (RPM and, of course, > > SRPM). I can send them to you. They are commented out in Portuguese, > > but when I package them they'll have comments in English and a > > "README" :-) > > Hi, could you send me a tarball of the sources, please? (no rpms) Sure... I'll do that. I'm starting today (I'm stuck with some projects, and I'll do this and go back to them). > > I don't use Cygnus tools (don't ask me why :-)). > > I'd like to ask why though. Mainly because of don't knowing they existed and, then, because of their standard appearance. I like to have control of what's happening. In many cases, a script is better than an executable because of that: you know what's happening and you can change it. Regards, -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> GPG Fingerprint 851B B620 626D 2AD0 E783 "Ser poeta não é minha ambição, E932 1330 BE6D A4A3 0625 é minha maneira de estar sozinho" - Fernando Pessoa. Publicações @ Conectiva S.A. Except where explicitly stated I speak on my own behalf. Exceto onde explicitado as declarações aqui feitas são apenas minhas. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Horacio MG 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jorge Godoy 1 sibling, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss Announcement : I have been repackaging completly the DocBook tools and rewritten all db* utilities. What I have been seeking is : - to have the db2* scripts change their status from "unmaintained" to "maintained" - to have better directory organization in /usr/lib/sgml - to have things work better with alternate stylesheets - to make as little assumptions as possible : no "common" stylesheet for html and printout if not wished, no need of merging the individual catalogs in a single CATALOG if not wished, etc - gnuish syntax - compatibility (if no alternate stylesheets used) with former docbook-tools My distribution will be used by Caldera OpenLinux and KDE project. I'm proposing to make it the standard docbook-tools as well, if you agree. Just let me know. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : " Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jorge Godoy 1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > My distribution will be used by Caldera OpenLinux and KDE project. I'm > proposing to make it the standard docbook-tools as well, if you > agree. Just let me know. Could you be so kind and put the package up on ftp? Maybe also as tar.gz for all of us without a RPM-based Linux (or Linux at all). You should also contact the Debian Project which might also be interested in this (you will probably at least get some help in packing this up as Debian-Package, which would be nice to have for a "standard docbook-tool"). Also SuSE might be interested, since they have such scripts of their own. I would also decide on a new name for the tools, all this db2something is quite confusing. What about "doctool"? Jochem -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jochem Huhmann, docbook-tools-discuss Jochem Huhmann wrote: > > * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > > My distribution will be used by Caldera OpenLinux and KDE project. I'm > > proposing to make it the standard docbook-tools as well, if you > > agree. Just let me know. > > Could you be so kind and put the package up on ftp? Maybe also as tar.gz > for all of us without a RPM-based Linux (or Linux at all). You should Caldera is a RPM-based distribution, so my packaging will probably be only profitable for those with RPM-based distributions, like the current DocBook tools that only offer a mirror of the source packages for those without RPM. Furthermore, I have been told the Debian project already did a very clean packaging of its own (seeking a greater compatibility with them could also be a concern, BTW). Of course the new db2* scripts do not depend on the packaging and I can send them to you. I don't want to put anything on KDE's ftp before I know my help proposal is accepted or refused here : as David said, there's no need to multiply the distributions. > also contact the Debian Project which might also be interested in this > (you will probably at least get some help in packing this up as > Debian-Package, which would be nice to have for a "standard > docbook-tool"). Also SuSE might be interested, since they have such > scripts of their own. Sure, we should at least seek a common directory layout. I think the reference version is here at the DocBook tools, so I won't start anything on my own before Mark gives his advice on the topic. > I would also decide on a new name for the tools, all this db2something > is quite confusing. What about "doctool"? Currently, the docbook-stylesheets package from the docbook-tools includes three things : 1 - Norman Walsh's modular stylesheets 2 - the db2* and install-catalog scripts 3 - some "glue" files like "cygnus-common.dsl" I think that (1) has to be packaged separately for modularity reasons, I suggest to rename (2) the "docbook-utils" (only a component of the docbook-tools), and to get rid of (3) because this kind of files imply a lot of assumptions on the way you are working. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff ` (5 more replies) 0 siblings, 6 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > Caldera is a RPM-based distribution, so my packaging will probably be > only profitable for those with RPM-based distributions, like the current > DocBook tools that only offer a mirror of the source packages for those > without RPM. Furthermore, I have been told the Debian project already > did a very clean packaging of its own (seeking a greater compatibility > with them could also be a concern, BTW). OK. What I meant is: There is some software like jade and the stylesheets. There are a lot of wrappers around these - Marks tools, the scripts from SuSE, the KDE-stuff and SGMLTools (for the most part a wrapper written in python). The software should be packaged like any other software, I don't see the point in putting it together with scripts and such. This creates conflicts with other packages. Try to install the SGMLTools (which come with the stylesheets and jade) together with other packages, that also install the stylesheets. This is a mess and every single Linux-Distribution comes up with it's own mess. This is not part of a solution but a part of the problem. > Currently, the docbook-stylesheets package from the docbook-tools > includes three things : > 1 - Norman Walsh's modular stylesheets > 2 - the db2* and install-catalog scripts > 3 - some "glue" files like "cygnus-common.dsl" > > I think that (1) has to be packaged separately for modularity reasons, I > suggest to rename (2) the "docbook-utils" (only a component of the > docbook-tools), and to get rid of (3) because this kind of files imply a > lot of assumptions on the way you are working. There should be some "standard" for directory layout, location of the catalog etc. Wrappers should build upon this common standard. So you could use whichever you want. Actually I believe this is an issue for the LSB or FHS-Projects. Caldera is also member of LSB and is responsible for the reference implementation, or am I wrong? Maybe you should ask Ralf Flaxa <rf@lst.de> who is assigned as technical lead for this task. Or ask on one of the LSB-lists. Jochem -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff ` (4 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss, dbaudens Jorge Godoy wrote: > I think the same. Isn't it subject for a new list? I can create one to > discuss it. It might be called "sgml-packages" and be hosted here at > Conectiva. Or, if nobody on this list gets bored, we might continue > talking here... I think we are starting to bore everyone here ;-). Let's go for a new list to discuss the details (please subscribe me in). Any distribution packager, or any interested person is welcome, and of course Mark Galassi's presence would be great. I'll have David Baudens which is packaging the same stuff at Mandrake join us as well. David Mason, are you interested to represent RedHat for that ? It would be great to have a Debian packager as well, but I don't know any. We'll present the results afterwards to this list, and submit them for approval to Mark Galassi. I think it's the more efficient and transparent way to proceed. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff ` (3 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jochem Huhmann, docbook-tools-discuss Jochem Huhmann wrote: > > * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > > (seeking a greater compatibility > > with Debian could also be a concern, BTW). > > OK. What I meant is: There is some software like jade and the > stylesheets. There are a lot of wrappers around these - Marks tools, the > scripts from SuSE, the KDE-stuff and SGMLTools (for the most part a > wrapper written in python). Hmmm, looks like a big mixture. Which KDE-stuff is in ??? I think we should not copy their packaging, but at least adopt the same directory names if possible. What is the result of a 'ls /usr/lib/sgml' on a debian ? > The software should be packaged like any > other software, I don't see the point in putting it together with > scripts and such. That's my opinion as well, it is the reason why I have been putting Mark's scripts (reworked by myself) in a new separate package named "docbook-utils". Mark could not do this before because the install-catalog script needed to be called very early, and this was because the scripts could only work with a merged CATALOG... Now it is an option to merge the catalogs, and therefore there's no more need to package the scripts along with some other package, and the dependancies are clean. (BTW, a strange consequence of the former situation was that the uninstalling failed at the end, because install-catalog was removed while it was still necessary for the uninstallation. Snake eating its tail...) > This creates conflicts with other packages. Try to > install the SGMLTools (which come with the stylesheets and jade) > together with other packages, that also install the stylesheets. This is > a mess and every single Linux-Distribution comes up with it's own > mess. This is not part of a solution but a part of the problem. SGML-Tools are not any longer maintained, so I don't want to rely on that. I'm sure Cees De Groot would understand perfectly. > There should be some "standard" for directory layout, location of the > catalog etc. Wrappers should build upon this common standard. So you > could use whichever you want. That's what I did for Caldera, and I'll keep it unless Debian has different names with a clean directory layout too. It would be stupid to have only two-letter differences... ;-) > Actually I believe this is an issue for the LSB or FHS-Projects. Caldera > is also member of LSB and is responsible for the reference > implementation, or am I wrong? You're perfectly true. > Maybe you should ask Ralf Flaxa > <rf@lst.de> who is assigned as technical lead for this task. Or ask on He's currently in the US and quite busy, but sure, I'll speak with him about that when I'll meet him again. > one of the LSB-lists. Yup. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: Jochem Huhmann, docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2413 bytes --] On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 11:00:58AM +0100, Eric Bischoff wrote: > Jochem Huhmann wrote: > > The software should be packaged like any > > other software, I don't see the point in putting it together with > > scripts and such. > > That's my opinion as well, it is the reason why I have been putting > Mark's scripts (reworked by myself) in a new separate package named > "docbook-utils". Mark could not do this before because the > install-catalog script needed to be called very early, and this was > because the scripts could only work with a merged CATALOG... Now it is > an option to merge the catalogs, and therefore there's no more need to > package the scripts along with some other package, and the dependancies > are clean. (BTW, a strange consequence of the former situation was that > the uninstalling failed at the end, because install-catalog was removed > while it was still necessary for the uninstallation. Snake eating its > tail...) You might have several catalogs merged in your personal catalog file. How? You can add a `CATALOG "file.cat"' in it and it will "automagically" include the other catalog. Look at "conectiva.cat" in the file I've sent you in the other message. It solves lots of problems and you don't need to merge an entire new catalog each time a new release is done. And, besides, you use the stylesheets catalog with all it's relative paths. It works wonderfully. > > There should be some "standard" for directory layout, location of the > > catalog etc. Wrappers should build upon this common standard. So you > > could use whichever you want. > > That's what I did for Caldera, and I'll keep it unless Debian has > different names with a clean directory layout too. It would be stupid to > have only two-letter differences... ;-) I'm doing some work at Conectiva Linux on that too. I'm using /usr/lib/sgml and then creating subdirectories with each stylesheet. It's still a mess, but I'm cleaning it up. -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> GPG Fingerprint 851B B620 626D 2AD0 E783 "Ser poeta não é minha ambição, E932 1330 BE6D A4A3 0625 é minha maneira de estar sozinho" - Fernando Pessoa. Publicações @ Conectiva S.A. Except where explicitly stated I speak on my own behalf. Exceto onde explicitado as declarações aqui feitas são apenas minhas. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > Jochem Huhmann wrote: > > > > * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > > > (seeking a greater compatibility > > > with Debian could also be a concern, BTW). > > > > OK. What I meant is: There is some software like jade and the > > stylesheets. There are a lot of wrappers around these - Marks tools, the > > scripts from SuSE, the KDE-stuff and SGMLTools (for the most part a > > wrapper written in python). > > Hmmm, looks like a big mixture. Which KDE-stuff is in ??? > I think we should not copy their packaging, but at least adopt the same > directory names if possible. > What is the result of a 'ls /usr/lib/sgml' on a debian ? Sorry, no, I don't talk only about Debian. The tools (and file locations and such) needed to process SGML with jade and DSSSL are packaged in a different way in every single Linux-Distribution and sometimes there are also additional packages, which do this in one more different way. One should see that "docbook-tools" actually are "tools for processing SGML with jade", not "tools for processing DocBook". The tool-chain for processing a DocBook file may also include eg. Emacs with PSGML (for editing) and also PSGML needs to know where to find the catalog. If someone wants to use or to write other tools for processing DocBook he also needs some basics to rely on. So you *can't* wrap up everything and put it in one package again and again. If there where some common standard for file locations and catalog handling, the user could plug in whatever he needs or wants and every application could rely on finding things. I would like to see a situation where a software developer just can use a Makefile to build HTML and Postscript versions of his software documentation on a Linux system, *without* to care about the wrappers and tools and file locations found on a random distribution. We will never get there if Caldera and Redhat and SuSE and Debian come with their own wrappers and file-locations. I see that you are trying to get this mess cleared up and that's great, but IMHO this has to be discussed with authors of other wrappers and maintainers of packages. I'm using Redhat systems since 4.0, Caldera since that "Caldera Network Desktop 1.0", Debian since 2.0 and SuSE since "S.u.S.E. 11/94"; if getting software compiled would have been such a mess as getting a SGML file rendered to a readable or printable format I never would have bothered with Linux. > > Actually I believe this is an issue for the LSB or FHS-Projects. Caldera > > is also member of LSB and is responsible for the reference > > implementation, or am I wrong? > > You're perfectly true. > > > Maybe you should ask Ralf Flaxa > > <rf@lst.de> who is assigned as technical lead for this task. Or ask on > > He's currently in the US and quite busy, but sure, I'll speak with him > about that when I'll meet him again. > > > one of the LSB-lists. > > Yup. Looks like you (or someone else) should write up a proposal, post it to lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org and cc it to all the maintainers and packagers and related lists (like sgml-tools@via.ecp.fr)... I'm quite sure that a lot of people being busy with regard to DocBook on Linux (or FreeBSD, which is quite comfortable with DocBook, the FreeBSD-Handbook is DocBook) are not reading this list. Jochem -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff ` (2 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss Jorge Godoy wrote: > If we don't accept merging catalogs, we ar going to allow users > specifying catalog at the command line. He (the user) will have to I didn't say "not accept to merge catalogs", but I said "accept not to merge catalogs" ;-) > say: > > - Where's jade/openjade stylesheets > - Where's DocBook stylesheets > - Where is/are his customized stylesheets. No. The user has the choice to have a merged CATALOG file, or not to have one. If he hasn't, the db2html script tries to use the "standard" places, which are defined by the directory layout we are discussing. I tell you, my scripts are quite intelligent ;-) (BTW, The user can also use --catalog option if he has an extra catalog, and --nostd option if he doesn't want these standard places. Everything is free to the user, but the default is not to type anything) > The command typed would be huge and subject to typing errors. I don't > think it's a good approach... See above. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 5 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: egcs; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss Jochem Huhmann wrote: > > Sorry, no, I don't talk only about Debian. The tools (and file locations > and such) needed to process SGML with jade and DSSSL are packaged in a > different way in every single Linux-Distribution and sometimes there are > also additional packages, which do this in one more different way. > > One should see that "docbook-tools" actually are "tools for processing > SGML with jade", not "tools for processing DocBook". The tool-chain for > processing a DocBook file may also include eg. Emacs with PSGML (for > editing) and also PSGML needs to know where to find the catalog. If > someone wants to use or to write other tools for processing DocBook he > also needs some basics to rely on. So you *can't* wrap up everything and > put it in one package again and again. If there where some common > standard for file locations and catalog handling, the user could plug in > whatever he needs or wants and every application could rely on finding > things. This is exactly what I have been starting. The problem with the current DocBook tools is that everything is mixed up in /usr/lib/sgml, so I wouldn't say it is a good base for standardization. Of course starting a new directory layout is not a way of standardizing things, but the previous messages in this list show that I haven't been the only one to feel that need. > I would like to see a situation where a software developer just can use > a Makefile to build HTML and Postscript versions of his software > documentation on a Linux system, *without* to care about the wrappers > and tools and file locations found on a random distribution. We will > never get there if Caldera and Redhat and SuSE and Debian come with > their own wrappers and file-locations. 100% agree. > I see that you are trying to get this mess cleared up and that's great, > but IMHO this has to be discussed with authors of other wrappers and > maintainers of packages. I'm using Redhat systems since 4.0, Caldera > since that "Caldera Network Desktop 1.0", Debian since 2.0 and SuSE > since "S.u.S.E. 11/94"; if getting software compiled would have been > such a mess as getting a SGML file rendered to a readable or printable > format I never would have bothered with Linux. Yeap. But here is maybe the greater place to do this standardization work, because it is the only maintained and active project. We can make the things more official in front of LSB if needed afterwards. > Looks like you (or someone else) should write up a proposal, post it to > lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org and cc it to all the maintainers and > packagers and related lists (like sgml-tools@via.ecp.fr)... I'm quite > sure that a lot of people being busy with regard to DocBook on Linux (or > FreeBSD, which is quite comfortable with DocBook, the FreeBSD-Handbook > is DocBook) are not reading this list. Can you do that as soon as we have the technical details mailing list set up and running ? I'm not familiar with these lists you're mentioning. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jochem Huhmann 1 sibling, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 686 bytes --] I've setup a list (temporary?) for disscussing it: To subscribe send a message to docbook-tool-subscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br and reply to the confirmation message. Send messages to list at docbook-tools@bazar.conectiva.com.br. You can unsubscribe by sending a message to docbook-tools-unsubscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br and replying the confirmation message or (in a slower way) writing to me. Please, all the interested on this issue subscribe to this list. Procmail rules can be made with the "Mailing-List" header :-) Sorry for the extra traffic here. -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> Setor de Publicações Publishing Department Conectiva S.A. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff, docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 891 bytes --] On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 07:16:56PM -0200, Jorge Godoy wrote: > I've setup a list (temporary?) for disscussing it: > > To subscribe send a message to > docbook-tool-subscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br and reply to the > confirmation message. Send messages to list at > docbook-tools@bazar.conectiva.com.br. > You can unsubscribe by sending a message to > docbook-tools-unsubscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br and replying the > confirmation message or (in a slower way) writing to me. > > Please, all the interested on this issue subscribe to this list. > Procmail rules can be made with the "Mailing-List" header :-) > > Sorry for the extra traffic here. A small correction: docbook-tools-subscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br There was one missing "s". :-( Typo error... -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> Setor de Publicações Publishing Department Conectiva S.A. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss * Jorge Godoy <godoy@conectiva.com.br> wrote: > I've setup a list (temporary?) for disscussing it: > > To subscribe send a message to > docbook-tool-subscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br and reply to the ^^^^ > confirmation message. Send messages to list at > docbook-tools@bazar.conectiva.com.br. ^^^^^ Is this "docbook-tool" or "docbook-tools"? > You can unsubscribe by sending a message to > docbook-tools-unsubscribe@bazar.conectiva.com.br and replying the ^^^^^ "docbook-tools" probably... Jochem -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > Can you do that as soon as we have the technical details mailing list > set up and running ? I'm not familiar with these lists you're > mentioning. I will chase down all related lists and a few individuals to mail a short announcement to this weekend. Or post it to comp.text.sgml and cc it to the lists and recipients. I will also do a cc to this list, OK? It would also be nice to have a web archive of the list, which is IMHO quite valuable in such cases. Jochem -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jochem Huhmann, docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1285 bytes --] Jochem Huhmann wrote: > > * Eric Bischoff <ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr> wrote: > > Can you do that as soon as we have the technical details mailing list > > set up and running ? I'm not familiar with these lists you're > > mentioning. > > I will chase down all related lists and a few individuals to mail a > short announcement to this weekend. Or post it to comp.text.sgml and cc > it to the lists and recipients. I will also do a cc to this list, OK? Yes, I think that unfortunately it will take all the week-end to have all the major actors join in. I will take profit of this week-end to prepare a descriptive paper of the purpose of this list, and a list the practical issues we could discuss. I'd like the list to be temporary, efficient, technical, and democratic ;-). -- Ãric Bischoff - mailto:ebisch@cybercable.tm.fr __________________________________________________ \^o~_. .~. ______ /( __ ) /V\ Toys story \__ \/ ( V // \\ \__| (__=v /( )\ |\___/ ) ^^-^^ \_____( ) Tux Konqui \__=v __________________________________________________ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 5 siblings, 2 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss Jorge Godoy wrote: > > > You might have several catalogs merged in your personal catalog > file. How? You can add a `CATALOG "file.cat"' in it and it will > "automagically" include the other catalog. Of course you can do a lot of things manually. But what I was saying is that a standard installation needed the "install-catalog" script (or some equivalent mechanism if you want to use the CATALOG keyword) to be installed *early* with respect to the other packages. But yes, it's true, "install-catalog" could be improved to use the CATALOG keyword instead of really merging the catalog themselves. But wasn't there a problem with the CATALOG keyword that wasn't supported by jade or something else ? > Look at "conectiva.cat" in the file I've sent you in the other > message. It solves lots of problems and you don't need to merge an > entire new catalog each time a new release is done. And, besides, you > use the stylesheets catalog with all it's relative paths. It works > wonderfully. You're mentioning another problem that I hadn't been speaking about : merging catalogs implied that the other packages couldn't be in their own directory, because the relative paths became relative to the merged CATALOG file. There are two ways to work around this (if not more) : - accept not to merge catalogs in the db2* scripts (my solution) - use the CATALOG keyword (your solution) but sure, the best would be to offer the choice between both solutions, therefore to enhance install-catalog script, with the restriction that I can remember the CATALOG keyword not to be recognized by some programs. My db2* scripts accept both a merged catalog or separate catalogs, the first having the priority, of course. > > That's what I did for Caldera, and I'll keep it unless Debian has > > different names with a clean directory layout too. It would be stupid to > > have only two-letter differences... ;-) > > I'm doing some work at Conectiva Linux on that too. > I'm using /usr/lib/sgml and then creating subdirectories with each > stylesheet. It's still a mess, but I'm cleaning it up. Same idea for what I did. What are your directory names ? I chose : docbook-dtd docbook-stylesheets iso-entities-8879.1986 jade kde Let's all take the same names, if you accept. I also suggest "gnome" for Gnome project customizations and "ldp" for Linux Documentation Project customizations. And I think it is becoming urgent that Mark should give us his blessing, so those evolutions become "official" ;-) -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5057 bytes --] On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 12:55:46PM +0100, Eric Bischoff wrote: > Jorge Godoy wrote: > > > > > > You might have several catalogs merged in your personal catalog > > file. How? You can add a `CATALOG "file.cat"' in it and it will > > "automagically" include the other catalog. > > Of course you can do a lot of things manually. But what I was saying is > that a standard installation needed the "install-catalog" script (or > some equivalent mechanism if you want to use the CATALOG keyword) to be > installed *early* with respect to the other packages. I understood what you said now. Sorry. > But yes, it's true, "install-catalog" could be improved to use the > CATALOG keyword instead of really merging the catalog themselves. But > wasn't there a problem with the CATALOG keyword that wasn't supported by > jade or something else ? I use it here for a few months now and I have no problem with it. > > Look at "conectiva.cat" in the file I've sent you in the other > > message. It solves lots of problems and you don't need to merge an > > entire new catalog each time a new release is done. And, besides, you > > use the stylesheets catalog with all it's relative paths. It works > > wonderfully. > > You're mentioning another problem that I hadn't been speaking about : > merging catalogs implied that the other packages couldn't be in their > own directory, because the relative paths became relative to the merged > CATALOG file. There are two > ways to work around this (if not more) : > - accept not to merge catalogs in the db2* scripts (my solution) > - use the CATALOG keyword (your solution) > > but sure, the best would be to offer the choice between both solutions, > therefore to enhance install-catalog script, with the restriction that I > can remember the CATALOG keyword not to be recognized by some programs. > My db2* scripts accept both a merged catalog or separate catalogs, the > first having the priority, of course. IMHO, if we want not interfere with the stylesheets used and want tro allow a generic use of these tools, there are few alternatives: - Using the CATALOG directive - Using the DELEGATE directive - Merging CATALOG files (would require that we _change_ the specified paths!) I think the first two are the best. If the stylesheet/DTD is well written and has a well formed catalog file, the first directive is the best (it's easier to implement and we don't need to know anything about what's in this specific catalog). The second would require that we know at least some part of the declarations being used. It's possible, but requires more work. The third is the most space expensive and needs more work than the first two. I won't work this way, but if you think it's easier, go ahead. Which programs don't recognize the CATALOG keyword? Jade and OpenJade work with no problems. Programs that don't work aren't in accordance with the specifications. Should we support them or "brake" them and make the author improve their programs? > > > That's what I did for Caldera, and I'll keep it unless Debian has > > > different names with a clean directory layout too. It would be stupid to > > > have only two-letter differences... ;-) > > > > I'm doing some work at Conectiva Linux on that too. > > I'm using /usr/lib/sgml and then creating subdirectories with each > > stylesheet. It's still a mess, but I'm cleaning it up. > > Same idea for what I did. What are your directory names ? I chose : > > docbook-dtd docbook-stylesheets iso-entities-8879.1986 jade kde > > Let's all take the same names, if you accept. I also suggest "gnome" for > Gnome project customizations and "ldp" for Linux Documentation Project > customizations. > > And I think it is becoming urgent that Mark should give us his blessing, > so those evolutions become "official" ;-) Ok... I'm using a slightly different notation: /usr/lib/sgml - docbook-3.1 - docbook-3.0 - docbook-4.0beta - docbook-2.4 - docbook-2.4.1 - docbook-version (generalization! I don't have this directory) - jade - iso-entities-8879.1986 (this is from sgmltools 1.09, not DocBook related) - gnome (as you suggested) - ldp (they don't have a stylesheet for DocBook yet...) - kde (they have it?) Numbering DocBook DTDs and stylesheets is needed. We have some documents in DocBook 2.4 (and they don't work with 3.1 files) and new documents are being written in newer versions of DocBook. The problem with "iso-entities" is that some stylesheets refer to them on it's catalog. Making a patch in a packaged distribution (RPM, deb, etc.) is easy, but I don't know if it's good in a plain .tar.gz distribution (of course, a note saying that files were modified and the like would be enough). BTW, there's another problem regarding iso-entities: sgmltools use them with upper case (ISOamsa) and Norm's stylesheets use it with lower case and an extension (isoamsa.gml). It's another standardization issue. -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> Setor de Publicações Publishment Division Conectiva S.A. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 1 sibling, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1266 bytes --] On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 12:55:46PM +0100, Eric Bischoff wrote: Sorry! I forgot one thing: > > Look at "conectiva.cat" in the file I've sent you in the other > > message. It solves lots of problems and you don't need to merge an > > entire new catalog each time a new release is done. And, besides, you > > use the stylesheets catalog with all it's relative paths. It works > > wonderfully. > > You're mentioning another problem that I hadn't been speaking about : > merging catalogs implied that the other packages couldn't be in their > own directory, because the relative paths became relative to the merged > CATALOG file. There are two > ways to work around this (if not more) : > - accept not to merge catalogs in the db2* scripts (my solution) > - use the CATALOG keyword (your solution) If we don't accept merging catalogs, we ar going to allow users specifying catalog at the command line. He (the user) will have to say: - Where's jade/openjade stylesheets - Where's DocBook stylesheets - Where is/are his customized stylesheets. The command typed would be huge and subject to typing errors. I don't think it's a good approach... -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> Setor de Publicações Publishment Division Conectiva S.A. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 5 siblings, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss Jorge Godoy wrote: > > IMHO, if we want not interfere with the stylesheets used and want tro > allow a generic use of these tools, there are few alternatives: > > - Using the CATALOG directive > - Using the DELEGATE directive > - Merging CATALOG files (would require that we _change_ the specified > paths!) - plus a fourth one, letting db2* scripts determine where are the catalogs (my solution) Among the first three ones, only the first one is really good, IMHO. The third one was chosen by the current DocBook-tools and implied a dirty directory layout if you don't want to re-work the paths. And this had bad consequences if you wanted to use alternate stylesheets. > Which programs don't recognize the CATALOG keyword? Jade and OpenJade > work with no problems. Programs that don't work aren't in accordance > with the specifications. Should we support them or "brake" them and > make the author improve their programs? Now I remember Epic does not recognize this keyword. > > Same idea for what I did. What are your directory names ? I chose : > > > > docbook-dtd docbook-stylesheets iso-entities-8879.1986 jade kde > > > > Let's all take the same names, if you accept. I also suggest "gnome" for > > Gnome project customizations and "ldp" for Linux Documentation Project > > customizations. > > > > And I think it is becoming urgent that Mark should give us his blessing, > > so those evolutions become "official" ;-) > > Ok... I'm using a slightly different notation: > > /usr/lib/sgml > - docbook-3.1 > - docbook-3.0 > - docbook-4.0beta > - docbook-2.4 > - docbook-2.4.1 > - docbook-version (generalization! I don't have this directory) > - jade > - iso-entities-8879.1986 (this is from sgmltools 1.09, not DocBook related) > - gnome (as you suggested) > - ldp (they don't have a stylesheet for DocBook yet...) > - kde (they have it?) Yes, kde customization is available in package "kdesdk", subdirectory "ksgmltools/customization" Why don't you put the stylesheets at the same level as the dtd ? it allows to change the stylesheets version, without changing the dtd, in a simpler way (there are more stylesheet versions than dtd ones). Docbook DTD and stylesheets numbering is a really good idea, indeed. It looks like you went even further in the reflexion than I did ;-). What about making a symbolic link from the generic name to the numbered name ? Like : docbook-dtd -> docbook-dtd-4.0beta. Iso-entities are not only needed by sgmltools 1.09, but by jade as well. Maybe you have them duplicate, just check. So I suggest : /usr/lib/sgml docbook-dtd-2.4 docbook-dtd-2.4.1 docbook-dtd-3.1 docbook-dtd-3.0 docbook-dtd-4.0beta docbook-dtd -> docbook-dtd-3.1 docbook-sylesheets-1.49 docbook-sylesheets-1.50 docbook-sylesheets-1.51 docbook-sylesheets-1.52 docbook-stylesheets -> docbook-stylesheets-1.52 jade iso-entities-8879.1986 gnome ldp kde > The problem with "iso-entities" is that some stylesheets refer to them > on it's catalog. Making a patch in a packaged distribution (RPM, deb, > etc.) is easy, but I don't know if it's good in a plain .tar.gz > distribution (of course, a note saying that files were modified and > the like would be enough). I have been adding a catalog for them in iso-entities-8879.1986, the one that was in sgml-tools-1.09 ;-) I searched a lot, even on ISO web servere, but I was unable to find something that looked "official". So I just did like the others and took what was available... > BTW, there's another problem regarding iso-entities: sgmltools use > them with upper case (ISOamsa) and Norm's stylesheets use it with > lower case and an extension (isoamsa.gml). It's another > standardization issue. I was about to say it. I took : ISOamsa ISOamsc ISOamso ISObox ISOcyr2 ISOgrk1 ISOgrk3 ISOlat1 ISOnum ISOtech ISOamsb ISOamsn ISOamsr ISOcyr1 ISOdia ISOgrk2 ISOgrk4 ISOlat2 ISOpub iso-entities.cat I had to remove the DTD catalog entries to have them shared between sgml-tools and the modular stylesheets. Maybe it's not the right solution, but it works (and anyway, this catalog had to be patched, because it uses the DTDDECL keyword which is not supported by Jade). Tell me if you have found a better solution. All of this discussion, according to me, shows that it was necessary to embetter the docbook-tools distribution, and to normalize the choices. -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5394 bytes --] On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 02:36:06PM +0100, Eric Bischoff wrote: > Jorge Godoy wrote: > > > > IMHO, if we want not interfere with the stylesheets used and want tro > > allow a generic use of these tools, there are few alternatives: > > > > - Using the CATALOG directive > > - Using the DELEGATE directive > > - Merging CATALOG files (would require that we _change_ the specified > > paths!) > > - plus a fourth one, letting db2* scripts determine where are the > catalogs (my solution) How to find them? They are named: - catalog - CATALOG - anything.cat - put your catalog name here... > Among the first three ones, only the first one is really good, IMHO. > > The third one was chosen by the current DocBook-tools and implied a > dirty directory layout if you don't want to re-work the paths. And this > had bad consequences if you wanted to use alternate stylesheets. That was what I said... :-) > > Which programs don't recognize the CATALOG keyword? Jade and OpenJade > > work with no problems. Programs that don't work aren't in accordance > > with the specifications. Should we support them or "brake" them and > > make the author improve their programs? > > Now I remember Epic does not recognize this keyword. Hmmm... I didn't know it. The question is the same: force them to be compliant with the specs or make a workaround? Workareounds are dangerous... We'll have to make it for every program that's not compliant with it... > Why don't you put the stylesheets at the same level as the dtd ? it > allows to change the stylesheets version, without changing the dtd, in a > simpler way (there are more stylesheet versions than dtd ones). Wait... What stylesheets are you talking about? I have another directory that I forgot listing: /usr/lib/sgml - modular-stylesheets which is Norm's modular stylesheets. If this is the stylesheets you are talking about, it's already done. > Docbook DTD and stylesheets numbering is a really good idea, indeed. It > looks like you went even further in the reflexion than I did ;-). What > about making a symbolic link from the generic name to the numbered name > ? Like : docbook-dtd -> docbook-dtd-4.0beta. I don't think it's a good idea and it isn't even needed. The declaration at the beginning of the document specifies what to use and the catalogs do the rest of the magic. > Iso-entities are not only needed by sgmltools 1.09, but by jade as well. > Maybe you have them duplicate, just check. I've checked. Actually, they aren't duplicated. My jade requires a "sgml-common" package which provides these files. I made a workaround to the "case" problem using symlinks. > So I suggest : > > /usr/lib/sgml > docbook-dtd-2.4 > docbook-dtd-2.4.1 > docbook-dtd-3.1 > docbook-dtd-3.0 > docbook-dtd-4.0beta > docbook-dtd -> docbook-dtd-3.1 > docbook-sylesheets-1.49 > docbook-sylesheets-1.50 > docbook-sylesheets-1.51 > docbook-sylesheets-1.52 > docbook-stylesheets -> docbook-stylesheets-1.52 > jade > iso-entities-8879.1986 > gnome > ldp > kde I don't see why symlinking docbook-dtd to a numbered directory. As I said, let the catalogs do the magic. > > The problem with "iso-entities" is that some stylesheets refer to them > > on it's catalog. Making a patch in a packaged distribution (RPM, deb, > > etc.) is easy, but I don't know if it's good in a plain .tar.gz > > distribution (of course, a note saying that files were modified and > > the like would be enough). > > I have been adding a catalog for them in iso-entities-8879.1986, the one > that was in sgml-tools-1.09 ;-) I searched a lot, even on ISO web > servere, but I was unable to find something that looked "official". So I > just did like the others and took what was available... I used symlinks. ;-) Not the best option, thought. I'll have to make a package with them and then adapt all the other. > > BTW, there's another problem regarding iso-entities: sgmltools use > > them with upper case (ISOamsa) and Norm's stylesheets use it with > > lower case and an extension (isoamsa.gml). It's another > > standardization issue. > > I was about to say it. I took : > > ISOamsa ISOamsc ISOamso ISObox ISOcyr2 ISOgrk1 ISOgrk3 ISOlat1 > ISOnum ISOtech > ISOamsb ISOamsn ISOamsr ISOcyr1 ISOdia ISOgrk2 ISOgrk4 ISOlat2 > ISOpub iso-entities.cat I changed as little as possible the DTDs. The symlinks in a specific package might solve the problem... > I had to remove the DTD catalog entries to have them shared between > sgml-tools and the modular stylesheets. Maybe it's not the right > solution, but it works (and anyway, this catalog had to be patched, > because it uses the DTDDECL keyword which is not supported by Jade). > Tell me if you have found a better solution. A new package. Which DTD are you talking about? I remember patching one, but now I don't remember which one... :-) > All of this discussion, according to me, shows that it was necessary to > embetter the docbook-tools distribution, and to normalize the choices. I think the same. Isn't it subject for a new list? I can create one to discuss it. It might be called "sgml-packages" and be hosted here at Conectiva. Or, if nobody on this list gets bored, we might continue talking here... Regards, -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> Setor de Publicações Publishment Division Conectiva S.A. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : " Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 1 sibling, 1 reply; 35+ messages in thread From: Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Bischoff; +Cc: docbook-tools-discuss [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1918 bytes --] On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 10:43:50AM +0100, Eric Bischoff wrote: > Announcement : > > I have been repackaging completly the DocBook tools and > rewritten all db* utilities. > > What I have been seeking is : > - to have the db2* scripts change their status from "unmaintained" > to "maintained" It would be nice... > - to have better directory organization in /usr/lib/sgml It depends on your distribution. How's you /usr/lib/sgml? I've done a few customizations here... :-) > - to have things work better with alternate stylesheets I do it with a wrapper, a Makefile and standar tools: jade/openjade & norm's modular stylesheets. > - to make as little assumptions as possible : no > "common" stylesheet for html and printout if not wished, > no need of merging the individual catalogs in a single CATALOG > if not wished, etc It's not difficult. That's one of the reasons I don't use Cygnus tools. > - gnuish syntax Hmmm... It would require some programming, but... it's possible too. > - compatibility (if no alternate stylesheets used) with > former docbook-tools What do you mean by "compatibility"? If your document is written in DocBook, it should be compatible with any tools used to process DocBook files. > My distribution will be used by Caldera OpenLinux and KDE project. I'm > proposing to > make it the standard docbook-tools as well, if you agree. Just let me > know. If you need some help, just drop me a message. -- Godoy. <godoy@conectiva.com.br> GPG Fingerprint 851B B620 626D 2AD0 E783 "Ser poeta não é minha ambição, E932 1330 BE6D A4A3 0625 é minha maneira de estar sozinho" - Fernando Pessoa. Publicações @ Conectiva S.A. Except where explicitly stated I speak on my own behalf. Exceto onde explicitado as declarações aqui feitas são apenas minhas. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
* Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jorge Godoy @ 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 0 siblings, 0 replies; 35+ messages in thread From: Eric Bischoff @ 2000-12-27 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: docbook-tools-discuss Jorge Godoy wrote: > > - to have the db2* scripts change their status from "unmaintained" > > to "maintained" > > It would be nice... (I would be the maintainer of those db2* scripts, of course) > > - to have better directory organization in /usr/lib/sgml > > It depends on your distribution. How's you /usr/lib/sgml? I've done a > few customizations here... :-) My distribution is the Caldera ;-). Here is /usr/lib/sgml organization [eric@quark eric]$ ls /usr/lib/sgml docbook-dtd docbook-stylesheets iso-entities-8879.1986 jade kde "iso-entities" directory name is the only one which does not match the package name, to ensure compatibility with sgml-tools 1.0 linuxdoc tools. The DocBook tools hosted by Cygnus sourceware FTP server suggest a different directory organisation, at least if you are using the RPM version. > > - to have things work better with alternate stylesheets > > I do it with a wrapper, a Makefile and standar tools: jade/openjade & > norm's modular stylesheets. Of course every one can build his own solution. At KDE we used a series of symbolic links as patches to the Cygnus tools. What I'm suggesting is a good common technical solution for everyone. > > - to make as little assumptions as possible : no > > "common" stylesheet for html and printout if not wished, > > no need of merging the individual catalogs in a single CATALOG > > if not wished, etc > > It's not difficult. That's one of the reasons I don't use Cygnus > tools. ;-) I didn't say I made something difficult. I said I wanted to share my experience and to integrate it into the Cygnus docbook tools, with Mark Galassi's approval and technical advice, of course. > > - gnuish syntax > > Hmmm... It would require some programming, but... it's possible too. It's not much again. You will be able to do things like db2html --version, db2html --help, db2html --catalog somewhere.cat, etc > > - compatibility (if no alternate stylesheets used) with > > former docbook-tools > > What do you mean by "compatibility"? If your document is written in > DocBook, it should be compatible with any tools used to process > DocBook files. I was referring to those famous db2* scripts, the ability to use the CATALOG merged by "install-catalog" script, etc. > > My distribution will be used by Caldera OpenLinux and KDE project. I'm > > proposing to > > make it the standard docbook-tools as well, if you agree. Just let me > > know. > > If you need some help, just drop me a message. Thanks, the more crazy cows we are, the funniest the meat will be ;-) What I need now is some approval by docbook-tools maintainer, Mark Galassi, and somewhere to build a docbook-utils homepage (docbook-utils being the set of db2* scripts, plus the install-catalog script, which I suggest to be separate from the modular stylesheets package now). -- Eric Bischoff - Documentation and Localization Caldera (Deutschland) GmbH - Linux for Business! Tel: +49 9131 7192 300 - Fax: +49 9131 7192 399 http://www.caldera.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 35+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-12-27 6:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 35+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` was something else - now SGML and XML David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Mark Galassi 2000-12-27 6:36 ` David Mason 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Norman Walsh 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Horacio MG 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : " Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jochem Huhmann 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jorge Godoy 2000-12-27 6:36 ` Eric Bischoff
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).