[NTG-context] DocBook in ConTeXt - any new ideas?
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
> updated since 2003. Does it mean it's so perfect or
> obsolete? Could you recommend other approaches which
> out-of-the-box (or almost). Obviously I would prefer
> 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).
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