ibatis-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeff Butler" <jeffgbut...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: New iBATIS Documentation Format
Date Tue, 03 Oct 2006 13:15:23 GMT
I'm for DOCBOOK.  It much more functional than APT at the cost of some
complexity, it's in wide use (something of a standard), it's not really that
hard to use, and there are tutorials all over the place.  I believe Larry
found that we could get free licenses to a good WYSIWYG tool if someone
needs that.

>From the APT home page:

The *APT* format (*A*lmost *P*lain *T*ext) is a simple markup language (like
HTML) than can be used to write simple article-like documents (like HTML).

I don't think our developer's guide could be described as a "simple
article-like document".

As for the deployment issue...I think DOCBOOK is as automatable as APT -
isn't it just a transform?

Jeff Butler




On 10/3/06, Richard Sullivan <itexpert.sullivan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> APT looks great.  The "IBatis for Python" crowd will love it ;=)
>
>
> > Others alternatives I'm forgetting?
> The docbook-wiki combination I mentioned in an earlier rant (
> http://doc-book.sourceforge.net/homepage/ ).    It basically offers
> similar advantages as APT and Confluence.  It is editable directly via
> the web, stores everything in docbook format and can generate whatever
> format you want.   The downside could be a tough installation. I just
> read the install guide - it looks OK as long as you run Red Hat or
> Fedora.  The product relies on a plethora of publishing RPMs.  There
> is nothing exotic amongst the packages and are probably all availabe
> in any RH/FC distro but if you run something else then I guess you are
> going to spend many hours figuring out exactly which packages you
> need.
>
> g'luck,
> Richard
> (who is still busy with his first IBatis project and probably about to
> unleash a whole bunch of newbie questions soon)
>

Mime
View raw message