Hello,
If I understand you right, your goal to change the docs encoding is to
allow for the docs translation.
But I don't think that the translation should be done that way (with
replacing sgml/xml/whatever).
Just as we don't translate server messages by copying all the source
files and replacing strings in them, we shouldn't translate the docs by
replacing sgml contents.
We at Postgres Pro using the gettext technologies for this. And we have
complete working toolchain (including modified Makefile) for translation
the docs.
(If someone is interested in, we can share our results and provide
everything needed to get started).
Those who translated sgmls/xml before are moving to gettext/po (The
FreeBSD Documentation Project is most remarkable example) or similar
approaches.
So I think a broader view to the evolution of the PostgreSQL
documentation is needed.
Best regards,
Alexander
23.08.2016 17:43, Tatsuo Ishii пишет:
>>> Really, what change we need, it is conversion from SGML to XML format.
>>> It would solve some real problems, such as ability to include diagrams
>>> in the docs,
> This argument sounds weak to me. Last time when I proposed to include
> diagrams in the docs in the pgsql-hackers list, some developers were
> against the idea because if the diagram is binary, it's hard to
> maintain in git. However up to now, there's no consensus that which
> text base diagram source (which allows to generate real diagrams from
> it) is good for our purpose. I don't see why just migrating to XML
> solves the problem.
>
> (the discussion on diagrams stopped in 2011, as far as I know)
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1307972167.2862.518.camel@core2
>
> Don't get me wrong. I am not against migrating to XML. I just want to
> say that let's not pretend that migrating to XML would solve all the
> problems we have.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Tatsuo Ishii
> SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
> Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
>
>
