Re: manual: little errors?

[Alan Horkan <horkana maths tcd ie>]

On Wed, 9 Apr 2003, Lars Clausen wrote:

> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 05:56:49 -0500
> From: Lars Clausen <lrclause@cs.uiuc.edu>
> Reply-To: dia-list@gnome.org
> To: dia-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: manual: little errors?

> > Definitely true,
> >
> > this reminds me:
> >
> > Could we switch to XML DocBook now?
>
> I've been browsing around a bit, and failed to find a good explanation of
> the benefits of XML DocBook over SGML DocBook.  Could you expand a bit on
> why we should switch?

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/dia-list/2003-January/msg00151.html
'because Gnome is switching' (and KDE switched ages ago)
makes for better integration and easier maintainance (would be nice if
distributions like redhat did not need to install a variety of different
help browsers).

having difficutly myself finding the reasons i read about why Gnome was
switching (i tried, before and i know it did not imagine it) but the XML
and SGML versions of DocBook achieved parity, XML has more modern
maintained tools available for it.  (not sure if you can do XSL with SGML,
it seems like on of the benifits of SGML).

here is the document explain the how,
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2001-November/msg00085.html
need to search further back to find more information about the why.

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2001-June/msg00032.html
this mail makes the point that browsers (such as Mozilla) stand a chance
of reading of XML docbook (unlike SGML).

Almost missed this, at the end of the same message, which is easily the
best reason i have heard so far for moving from SGML Docbook to XML
Docbook "plus DocBook will be *only* XML by 5.0."

Sincerely

Alan Horkan
http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/