Python documentation in DocBook

[Gerhard Häring]

In article <Xns92C5C92001CEEdpawsonfreeservecouk at 216.168.3.44>, DaveP wrote:
> martin at v.loewis.de (Martin v. Loewis) wrote 
>> In the current setup, such a system is not required. I believe it
>> would be possible to implement, though, given the existing TeX->XML
>> tool.
>> 
>> However, it is not clear to what the value would be of completing the
>> circle, given that the XML is of no use.
> 
> Martin, your prejudice is showing; very badly :-)

Martin is one of the project leaders of the PyXML project ;-)

Perhaps you ought to get involved with XML a little more to learn to hate it
<0.4 wink>

While I use Docbook and XML from time to time, I really can't understand all
the hype about XML. Just think about the acronym: E_x_tensible _M_arkup
_L_anguage. This means you can create all sorts of languages for all sorts of
application domains with it.  It standardizes the syntax of these languages, so
that if you can parse one, you can parse any.

But XML says *nothing* about semantics. So the *real* problems stay just as
hard as they were before.

Now these hard problems have already been solved for the current Python doc
system.  And IMO it doesn't matter much what the documentation source is
written in, be it a subset of LaTex or some form of Docbook.
-- 
Gerhard Häring
OPUS GmbH München
Tel.: +49 89 - 889 49 7 - 32
http://www.opus-gmbh.net/