Re: [architecture] Documentation Standard Requirements

[David Li <taweili@xxxxxxxxx>]

Even the exact format is hard to agree on right now. I mentioned two 
DocBook and Apache Forest. However, I guess we can at least assume the 
format is going to be XML based. Remember, there are still old timers 
using either emcas or vi. A binary format would be difficult.

Once XML based, it's not hard to transform to each other and there are 
quite a few of XML diff/merge tool that can help.

Plus, there is an XML standard called xml:tm (Translation memory) that 
can help translators in updating the documents.

David


On Feb 15, 2005, at 7:18 PM, Pierre-Yves Gibello wrote:

> David Li wrote:
>
> > The basic list of requirements layout from the first post on document 
> > format is:
> >
> > 1. open format
> > 2. easy to generate diff
> > 3. support for translation maintenance
> What about using an open XML format for the document, and... the CVS 
> for the diff ?
>
> In the eventuality there are many modifications, the CVS diff may be 
> difficult to exploit. But :
> - It at leasts points out what has been changed and where (even if 
> merging the information from the CVS with the document itself can be 
> tricky - can it be automated ??).
> - It makes easy to detect new files, or deprecated ones.
> - It gives a good idea of the amount of work to be done so the 
> document gets up to date (little submissions = no need to rework the 
> translation, many of them = document outdated).
>
> Maybe a crazy idea, but...
>
> Regards,
> Pierre-Yves Gibello - ExperLog
>
>
>
> --
> You receive this message as a subscriber of the 
> architecture@xxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing list.
> To unsubscribe: mailto:architecture-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For general help: mailto:sympa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=help
> ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page: http://www.objectweb.org/wws