Re: [DOCS] Docbook 5.x

From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jürgen Purtz <juergen(at)purtz(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Docbook 5.x
Date: 2017-11-25 05:50:30
Message-ID: 7a6cc69f-c8b9-686b-9c00-0e10866ee163@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Hello,
23.11.2017 17:53, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/15/17 16:06, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Here is the final patch set for the conversion.
> I have committed this.
Great! Thank you for your work!
And in light of possible need to convert to xml older branches too,
maybe we should simplify INSTALL now.
Please, consider applying the attached patch. It produces the same
INSTALL and is much better in the following aspects.

1. All the INSTALL content is placed in two files (installation.sgml and
installation-single.xsl) instead of three (installation.sgml,
standalone-install.xml, standalone-profile.xsl).
2. There are no unreadable and untranslatable (in context) constructions
such as
<xsl:template match="xref[(at)linkend='plpython-python23']">
  <xsl:text>the
</xsl:text><application>PL/Python</application><xsl:text>
documentation</xsl:text>
</xsl:template>
(Sometimes translators need to replace larger fragments.)
3. It uses only XSLT (which we use already), no xi:include.
4. It doesn't generate complete postgres.sgml to process only the
installation section.

I understand that it will take some time to review it, but I think it's
justified by the portability and supportability reasons.

Best regards,

------
Alexander Lakhin
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment Content-Type Size
installation.patch text/x-patch 27.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Lakhin 2017-11-25 06:18:14 Re: MacPorts xsltproc is very slow?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-11-25 04:49:59 Re: MacPorts xsltproc is very slow?