On Sep 25, 2006, at 7:02 PM, Sam Roberts wrote:
For serious documentation (like manuals for all the s/w you will ever
make, in every possible output format, and with a good chance of
parsing
rdoc output and generating docbook xml when you finally need printed
docs for you ruby libs, and it will be easy to write other doc
automation tools -- its xml!), I would go with docbook-xml. You
will do
things that you couldn't do with $10,000 commercial tools.
Hey, you could use builder templates! I'm kind of surprised a
cursory google didn't turn up a DSL.
I use word for work, because it's easy for the non-tech types. It
works okay for documents less than 20 pages which is most of the
documentation I do. Sometimes I use open office but it has a number
of the same annoyances as word and there's no really mac-friendly
version (still requires X). I'd love to use LaTeX, but if I did
there'd be little hope of coworkers helping with editing. Haven't
tried others, but docbook xml is certainly intriguing. Thanks for
the starting points.
-Mat
|
