On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 06:11:43PM -0600, Jimmy Wales wrote: Thanks very much. If we do in fact go with Wiki (and we're not sure of that) rather than a simpler "edit this page" we roll ourselves, we will be adding to it the ability to convert the tags into DocBook. So: *item *item *item becomes <simplelist> <listitem>item</listitem> <listitem>item</listitem> <listitem>item</listitem> </simplelist> and so on. Might be of use to you someday if you want to publish something out of Wikipedia in DocBook XML format. Just keep it in mind. I've already started such a script, 'cause we'll need it regardless. -- David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net Linux Documentation Project david(a)lupercalia.net Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org Depending on a single company for all future OS innovation and on another for all future CPU innovation would be tragic for an industry driven by technology. --Tom R. Halfhill, former Byte Magazine Senior Editor

On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 02:07:02PM -0800, Larry Sanger wrote: If you want to take 'er for a spin, go to db.linuxdoc.org. Use 'guest,guest' for your username/password. Edit any document meta-data. Click the "Edit (test)" link from within that. You'll get the document's pseudo-wiki edit box. When you click save it will show you the docbook it rendered. I'm keeping meta-data separately, as you'll see in the database. These are valid but are being expanded hourly. ;-) =Title= <sect1><title>Title</title> <sect1> =Title|id= <sect1 id='id'><title>Title</title> <sect1> (works for other sect levels as well) ==Title== <sect2><title>Title</title> </sect2> ===Title=== <sect3><title>Title</title> </sect3> Foo <para>Foo</para> #Foo <orderedlist> #Bar <listitem><para>Foo</para></listitem> #Baz <listitem><para>Bar</para></listitem> <listitem><para>Baz</para></listitem> </orderedlist> *Foo <simplelist> *Bar <listitem><para>Foo</para></listitem> *Baz <listitem><para>Bar</para></listitem> <listitem><para>Baz</para></listitem> </simplelist> [[foo]] <ulink url='url-to-ldp doc by that id> <citetitle>document-title</citetitle> </ulink> [[http://foo.org]] <ulink url='http://foo.org'> <citetitle>http://foo.org</citetitle> </ulink> [[http://foo.org Foo]] <ulink url='http://foo.org'> <citetitle>Foo</citetitle> </ulink> [Foo] <filename>Foo</filename> '''Foo''' <emphasis>Foo</emphasis> <foo></foo> <foo></foo> Or, you can insert arbitrary DocBook. It cannot be embedded within anything else, though. In other words, you cannot have DocBook and one of the constructs above in the same line. Any text that starts with "<" is considered docbook, until the close tag is found. Tags can be nested arbitrarily deep. It won't be wrapped with <para> tags or anything, so you'll need to do that manually if you insert DocBook. As you can see, it's heavily influenced by Wikipedia, my only real wiki experience. :-) -- David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net Linux Documentation Project david(a)lupercalia.net Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org Holy ad nauseam: If I hear anyone from Microsoft talk about the freedom to innovate one more time, I think I'll hurl a month's worth of cookies. Instead of worrying about whether or not the government will stop Microsoft from innovating in the future, the head honchos in Redmond ought to spend some energy trying to figure out what force has prevented them from innovating over the past decade. --InfoWorld Editor Nicholas Petreley - December 20, 1999

On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 04:50:53PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: I agree that any complete-ish implementation of DocBook would be very hard and frought with difficulty. However, being about to export into basic docbook (meaning not much more than links, sections, and <para> tags) would allow the content to be worked into DocBook based publication systems and such, and also the generation of pdf, postscript, and other outputs. And *that* much at least would be fairly easy and worth doing imho. -- David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net Linux Documentation Project david(a)lupercalia.net Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org And let's face facts. innovation has never been Microsoft's strong suite. We're much better at ripping off our competitors. For example, we did not invent either ASP or IE, we bought them! --E-mail from an unidentified Microsoft employee, as revealed in the antitrust trial