FWIW, I have been playing a little bit with the FC4test3 build, and as of last night, OO.o now will create DocBook XML 4.1.2 documents "out of the box," as long as the Java environment is installed. This could be a great step forward for our project since it would allow non-Emacs, non- XML folks to write documents. If I use OO.o styles as follows, the XSLT stuff makes valid DocBook XML:
OO.o format: (OO.o styles are in [] brackets) -=-=-=- [Heading1]My Title[/Heading1] [Body text]Some text.[/Body text] [Heading2]Another Chunk[/Heading2] [Body text]Some more text.[/Body text]
Produces this DocBook XML 4.1.2 text (although the indentation may not match PSGML): -=-=-=- <sect1> <title>My Title</title> <para>Some text.</para> <sect2> <title>Another Chunk</title> <para>Some more text.</para> </sect2> </sect1>
It's a great start, especially considering what a confusing PITA it is for a newbie to install any DocBook functionality in OO.o 1.1.x.
I haven't fully investigated yet how well the XSLT stuff in OO.o works to import documents. In other words, will it serve well for collaboration between people who are not using the same tool? I don't know, but the barrier certainly seems significantly lower for first-time contributors, if they prefer to write in a full-featured WYSIWYG word processor.
Next up -- and after the IG is out and the DocG is revving up -- I may look into creating an OO.o style template that would be even more WYSIWYG than what's there now. It would include properly formatted admonitions with graphics, coloration to match the HTML build, etc.
This is just a mini-news bulletin, not a call for a new toolchain. However, since the tool is available and may provide functionality for new contributors, it will probably be addressed in the Documentation Guide.
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 13:49 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
FWIW, I have been playing a little bit with the FC4test3 build, and as of last night, OO.o now will create DocBook XML 4.1.2 documents "out of the box," as long as the Java environment is installed. This could be a great step forward for our project since it would allow non-Emacs, non- XML folks to write documents.
Stunning !
I haven't fully investigated yet how well the XSLT stuff in OO.o works to import documents. In other words, will it serve well for collaboration between people who are not using the same tool?
FWIW, the main issue I had with gedit > Emacs switching was actually the indenting. Emacs indents nicely for DocBook written in it, but if you also edit the file with something that doesn't indent then the layout gets messed up. I opted to exclusively use Emacs to avoid this issue.
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 19:20 +0100, Stuart Ellis wrote:
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 13:49 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
FWIW, I have been playing a little bit with the FC4test3 build, and as of last night, OO.o now will create DocBook XML 4.1.2 documents "out of the box," as long as the Java environment is installed. This could be a great step forward for our project since it would allow non-Emacs, non- XML folks to write documents.
Stunning !
I haven't fully investigated yet how well the XSLT stuff in OO.o works to import documents. In other words, will it serve well for collaboration between people who are not using the same tool?
FWIW, the main issue I had with gedit > Emacs switching was actually the indenting. Emacs indents nicely for DocBook written in it, but if you also edit the file with something that doesn't indent then the layout gets messed up. I opted to exclusively use Emacs to avoid this issue.
That's a great point. It's why I buckled down into Emacs when I started working in the FDP. I would have preferred to stay with vi or use something less daunting... but the collaboration factor is what convinced me to take the plunge. I'm very glad I did, because I keep discovering new and cool things I can do easily with Emacs!
I'm sure many other people will end up taking this road too -- contributing a first cut document written in some other tool, and then trying Emacs to make collaboration easier. As long as people participate, though, it's really a secondary concern.
Maybe if we can work with the new toolset in OO.o, we'll be able to come up with something that people can live with up to the point of final editorial. Good backburner issue, methinks....
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 01:49:36PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
FWIW, I have been playing a little bit with the FC4test3 build, and as of last night, OO.o now will create DocBook XML 4.1.2 documents "out of the box," as long as the Java environment is installed.
Hmm, is this still working for you? I just tried with 1.9.104-2 and it just gives an error every time -- even with just a single line 'foo' in Heading 1. "The file could not be written."
Tim. */
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 22:48 +0100, Tim Waugh wrote:
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 01:49:36PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
FWIW, I have been playing a little bit with the FC4test3 build, and as of last night, OO.o now will create DocBook XML 4.1.2 documents "out of the box," as long as the Java environment is installed.
Hmm, is this still working for you? I just tried with 1.9.104-2 and it just gives an error every time -- even with just a single line 'foo' in Heading 1. "The file could not be written."
Just updated FC4t3 and the same now happens for me. *sigh* I filed a bug for this, but I highly doubt it will be fixed for FC4 at this point.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158903