GnuCash Concept Guide

[David Grant]

On April 6, 2006 07:24 pm, Bengt Thuree wrote:
> On Fr, 2006-04-07, 09:32, David Grant skrev:
> > But why do you even need docbook in the first place? Why not just use
> > mediawiki?
> >
> > I definitely recommend putting all the documentation in some form of
> > wiki or drupal form so that anyone can edit pages easily.
>
> Ok, I am definitely not an expert in this area :)
> Anyway, having it on a wiki format would be great for the easy of updating
> it. You have to be online to do serious work though.

True, but you can always copy and paste it into a local file and edit. Sure 
there is the danger than any "serious" work will take days and by the time 
you've made your changes, someone else will have made more changes. But 
that's true with any documentation...some rcs is needed. And who isn't always 
online nowadays anyways?

> But docbook is the standard format for documentation as far as I
> understand, and after checking the links it seems to me that the various
> tools to convert from wiki to docbook is at beta stage, and with not
> perfect result yet.

I think the docbook-wiki project seems pretty mature. And it sounds like the 
Drupal book->docbook module works fairly well as well. I think the gains of 
having such a system outweigh any small bugs there might be due to its 
beta-ness.

> Or perhaps we simple decide that the documentation should only be in
> MediaWiki format on the web. Not to good if you ask me.

As a user I'd be someone who would be quite content with this option. I don't 
know mediawiki very well, but as it is the system underlying Wikipedia, I 
wouldn't be surprised if some way of exporting a bunch of pages to PDF 
doesn't exist already. I also wouldn't be surprised if some hierarchical 
system was already in place (ie. chapters). I guess mediawiki's categories 
system might achieve that...

David