Volunteering to assist with documentation docbook conversion.

Michael Verret michael.verret at gmail.com
Fri May 23 11:08:32 PDT 2008

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Chuck Robey <chuckr at telenix.org> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Peter Hutterer wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 09:57:31AM -0500, Michael Verret wrote:
>>>> I did a couple man pages, and Eamon & Peter have done a couple larger docs.
>>>> For examples of what we did, see:
>>>>        lib/libXcomposite/man/   (but note bug #12725)
>>>>        lib/libXtst/man/
>>>>        doc/xorg-docs/sgml/core/Xserver-spec.sgml
>>>>        doc/xorg-docs/specs/Xi/protocol.xml
>>>> Obviously it would be good to establish some conventions for consistency
>>>> (sgml or xml for instance).
>>> Before I go too far, which do you prefer? My first instinct is XML.
>> I agree. xml seems to be more fashionable these days than sgml.
> Boy I hate to see decisions made based upon intuitions of popularity.  In case
> anyone remembers, that's how Microsoft built itself.  You NEED popularity!  Who
> cares about quality?

So what is your preference? SGML or XML?


More information about the xorg mailing list