Re: DocBook 5.2

On 06.09.22 21:28, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 05.09.22 11:50, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
>> Therefore, we should consider to introduce another validator. During
>> the migration phase,
>> we have used **jing**. It's Java, it's fast, the error messages are
>> very precise. But there
>> are many others:https://relaxng.org/#validators. Should we possibly
>> provide multiple
>> validators in doc/src/sgml/Makefile?
>
> If you follow the links on that page, it appears that all the projects
> other than jing are abandoned.  Even jing has a very sporadic release
> history (2015 -> 2018 -> 2022).  Last year at FOSDEM I gave a talk
> about the state of the DocBook toolchain [0], where I found that there
> is pretty much no tooling available for Relax-NG.  So it's great that
> there is a 2022 release of jing, but before we can consider relying on
> that, it might be nice to see a bit more of a track record.  (And we
> should also wait a little to make it trickle in stable packages for
> common operating systems.)
>
> [0]: https://ftp.fau.de/fosdem/2021/D.docs/ttdpostgresdocbook.webm
>
>
The work on the migration has reached a stage where the resulting files
validates against the Relax NG schema and HTML output is generated, see
attached README,md, conv.sh, and doRealModifications.sh. If you want to
test the suite, I recommend the use of jing for the validation process.

The generation of PDF and Epub shows an unacceptable runtime behavior.
An intentionally reduced postgres.sgml file (up to about 100 pages of
output) creates the expected pdf and epub output. After some work on
this problem I don't have any idea how to solve it. During the
sgml-to-xml conversion we faced a similar problem and solved it with an
additional xsl-script. Can someone support me?

--
J. Purtz