Subject: Re: simplifying htdocs build procedure (long term)
To: None <>
From: Ulrich Habel <>
List: netbsd-docs
Date: 02/03/2006 12:00:35
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jan Schaumann wrote,

[lots of good points snipped]

> >  Also, web design is another discussion topic independent
> >  from the build infrastructure.  Hubert suggests adding navigation
> >  link to our pages, for example, but it is not difficult to add it
> >  technically.  If you have ideas for improving web design, I would
> >  like to know them.
> I think this, too, can be deal with when we have made progress and
> simplified the current process.  One step at a time. :-)
> If you have concrete ideas on how to get these improvements started, I'd
> be all in favor of creating a branch of htdocs and working it out.

The discussion about xml has been shortened I guess (which I don't mind
as I am one of those docbook'ers too).

What about starting a small prototype just to get the idea how much work
it'll be to transfer all the documentation to the new buildtoolchain
(if needed) or how complex the toolchain will be when all the current
needs are implemented. What still brings up the question what is
needed e.g. eps files are quite useless for docbook xml.=20

Maybe it's useful to commit ourselves to standard of documentation. Is
docbook-website sufficient for us or do we need the full docbook
set? From my experiences so far it's not useful to use the full docbook
set - about 20 tags are more than enough, shall we sort them out while a
prototype of the buildchain is implemented?

I really would like to support with converting the old .list files but a
target format would make sense before someone starts with the


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (NetBSD)