> At Vail we used linuxdoc and sgmlfmt to generate ASCII, Postscript,
> HTML, and PDF from sgml source when documenting projects. The HTML was
> on a an intranet server, and all the programmer had to do was "gmake
> install" in the docs directory for a module and the online doc was
> updated as well as printable manuals.
> > I can change to sgml, but I still need to generate an ASCII HISTORY
> > file.
For the last release I generated an ASCII version of the INSTALL file
from the sgml sources. It was easy, though not completely transparent; I
would generate RTF, import into Applix, do some minor formatting touchup
(this is optional), then save as a formatted ASCII file.
Brandon Ibach was interested in helping with the sgml->troff/man
conversion problem, and from what I gather from seeing his postings on
an sgml mailing list has been working extensively with the sgml toolset.
Don't know if he still has plans to look at the troff or plain text
output issue though.
Just yesterday I set up my hub.org account to generate the full html doc
set with a single command, and I believe that I have the group
permissions set so that Bruce or others could do the same in my
directory. Bruce and others could also generate any RTF files from my
cvs tree on hub.org, or copy my setup and do it in their own tree. I
need to touch up a couple of files to get the tutorial building again
(we didn't bother building a new one for v6.4) and will send more
detailed instructions soon.
Bruce, do you have an editor which can read RTF and output plain text?
btw, this brings up a question: if we generate snapshot docs on a, say,
daily basis and post them on the web site should that be in a different
place than where they are posted currently? There should probably be a
stable set of docs from the last release and then a different place for
docs related to the current development tree.
What do you think Hal? Where should development or snapshot docs go??
- Tom
