Hi,
It's not easy to document in asciidoc. Personally, I have flashbacks to
TGAL/TFORM (for you old Tandem folks) that we used in the 80s. Seriously?
I've opened a discussion on the dev community list on this topic. So far,
no one seems to say that you MUST use markup languages for your
documentation.
>From what I see, we'd been trading off being able to do diffs in source
control vs. having user-visible diffs in the documentation (via change
bars) and a REAL word processor. To me, the tradeoff is simple: use the
real word processor.
In addition, I think it'd be much easier to translate documents and to get
people to update them. Who wants to learn a markup language and all its
intricacies. (Trust me, table handling is a royal pain and so is PDF
translation.)
I want to be clear that all forms of source control diffs disappear if we
move to AAO: the .odoc files are really zip archives with several files in
them. Also, we might lose the capability to provide the documents in
web-page format; experimentation needed.
What is your opinion on the matter? Would you be more willing to update
documents if using AAO, which is pretty similar to working in Word.
http://openoffice.apache.org/
--
Thanks,
Gunnar
*If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
|