On 22.07.2016 16:27, Robert Ramey wrote:
On 7/22/16 12:58 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 22.07.2016 15:45, Robert Ramey wrote:
On 7/22/16 11:25 AM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
BoostBook was invented inside Boost, but to a large extend is useful outside of Boost. So a few years ago we started an effort to "standardize" it, i.e. merge it (and by "it" I mean the schema as well as the stylesheets) into the DocBook project itself. (Note that some of the BoostBook are actually too specific for a wider audience, but the parts that aren't should eventually be available as part of DocBook.
OK - so this is a DocBook project rather than a Boost project.
But the version of DocBook that boost uses is DocBook 4 and uses a DTD schema. The more current version of DocBook is 5.0. DocBook 5.1 is specified but the last complete reference is DocBook 5.0. And interest in DocBook has seemed to have waned. Of course it's not going to disappear as a lot of stuff is made for it. And, though I hate XML, it does a good job of factoring out the meaning of the document elements from that of the formating. I think it was a good choice for BoostBook to be a specialized version of DocBook which includes transforms from BoostBook to DocBook.
I'm not entirely sure I see the point you are trying to make. (I should clarify: the "standardization" effort I'm talking about means to take the 95% of BoostBook that are generic and produce an RNG grammar from it that extends the DocBook 5.x RNG grammar.)
My point is .. I'm just wondering about the value of such an effort. I think it's great that you want to make something better, I'm just suggesting you consider the best return on your efforts. I don't see how enhancing DocBook would have anything to do with boost.
Who said it did ? There is a world outside Boost, didn't you notice ? ;-) Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...