Fedora DTD?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 19:30 -0400, Mark Johnson wrote:
> I'm actually neutral on this general argument/discussion, (despite my 
> above comments), but I would like to say that if someone (i.e. Thomas) 
> is willing to take this on, it might lessen the learning curve a bit for 
> new authors. (whoops. /me already said this)

Almost no one wants the learning curve of DocBook XML anyway, which is
why all the talk about Wiki has been dominating the list of late.  Most
people seem to do their drafts in HTML, and now that OO.o is a
possibility, I suspect many people will make use of that as well.  Those
of us using Emacs (or vi) with XML facilities are probably a minority at
this point, so this is probably all moot.  I'd bet that using a subset
is going to inconvenience as many people as it would help.  This is not
to say the idea has no merit, more that the ship has sailed...

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20050824/05dda987/attachment.sig>