Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> > As I said then, this is absolutely untrue. OpenOffice.org, for example,
> > works with DocBook XML but not SGML. There are also a plethora of XML
> > editing and publishing tools which can been used for Docbook XML which
> > are not available for SGML. A simple look at this page:
> > http://wiki.docbook.org/topic/DocBookAuthoringTools
> > .... shows that there are more than twice as many authoring tools which
> > support only XML as support SGML -- and that most of the tools which
> > support SGML are out-of-maintenance.
>
> This is confusing authoring tools (ie, stuff for more or less WYSIWYG
> editing of the document source) with output generation tools.
>
> As for authoring tools, show me one that produces SGML or XML that's
> reasonably readable, and I might worry about allowing people to use it.
> Most of the ones I've seen would render the doc sources unreadable for
> anyone not using an authoring tool (possibly even the very same
> authoring tool). We are not going to move in that direction
> because it would piss off the people who do the bulk of the work now.
And diffs would be either very large or useless.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
