[DOC-SIG] Library reference manual debate

[Paul Prescod]

Fred L. Drake wrote:
> 
> Fredrik Lundh writes:
>  > 1. Settle on a DTD.  Can we use DocBook as is?  What extensions
>  >    are needed?  (Paul?  Fred?)
> 
>   Unless Paul has some specific objections, I think we should at least
> start with the standard docbook DTD.  We can adjust if we find
> problems with toolsets or complexity.

My only concern is with trying to do too much at once. If we can just
get the book into some SGML variant, no matter how bizarre, then our
life becomes easier because we can use either Python or Jade for further
transformations. Once we are there, we can aim for DocBook.
 
>   I can work on this, as I've whacked around in the old partparse.py
> somewhat.  I'll look for other alternatives before I start whacking on
> it again.

Right, this again seems to argue in favour of doing the TeX->SGML step
separate from the SGML->DocBook step. You can do TeX->SGML with no help
and without consulting the DocBook DTD. Your only constraint is "don't
lose information." I can do the SGML->DocBook as part of a collaborative
project with discussion on the features and markup we need.
 
 Pual Prescod

_______________
DOC-SIG  - SIG for the Python Documentation Project

send messages to: doc-sig@python.org
administrivia to: doc-sig-request@python.org
_______________