[NTG-context] DocBook in ConTeXt - any new ideas?

Thomas Schmitz tschmit1 at uni-bonn.de
Thu Jun 2 12:20:29 CEST 2011

On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 11:39:46 +0200
  Piotr Kopszak <kopszak at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear list,
> I am beginning a rather tedious documentation project 
>and will most
>   probably end up with DocBook. The fact is I haven't 
>used it for any
>   serious work for about 10 years. Docbook In ConText 
>haven't been
>   updated since 2003. Does it mean it's so perfect or 
>instead rather
>   obsolete? Could you recommend other approaches which 
>   out-of-the-box (or almost). Obviously I would prefer 
>ConTeXt based
>   solutions. DocBook is not mandatory in fact, I would 
>happily learn  other
>   documentation system. Main prerequisite is utf-8 
>output at least in
>   pdf and html and sensible defaults (this time I don't 
>want to be a
>   typographer, nor I want to fiddle with structure).
>   Best
>   Piotr
>   --
>   http://okle.pl

Difficult to say of course without knowing the complexity 
of your documents, but just a few thoughts: if you're 
referring to Simon Pepping's "Docbook in ConTeXt," this 
was targeted at mkii, so it will probably still work, but 
could be considered obsolete. xml support in mkiv has 
changed a lot, but is much more powerful and flexible. 
It's fairly easy to write a stylesheet to translate your 
xml for typesetting, so I would look at the relevant xml 
documentation (like xml-mkiv.pdf) and make a fresh start. 
You can always refine and elaborate things as you go, and 
if you really hit a wall, there's the list.


More information about the ntg-context mailing list