Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 02:21:59 +0900 From: Jun Kuriyama <kuriyama@FreeBSD.org> To: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Default FDP docs installation directory? Message-ID: <14273.33591.825261.22222V@localhost.sky.rim.or.jp> In-Reply-To: In your message of "Sun, 22 Aug 1999 22:14:07 %2B0100" <19990822221406.A80051@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> References: <19990818121931.A4266@kilt.nothing-going-on.org> <19990819131224.A844@kilt.nothing-going-on.org> <vqcemgwm9q1.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <19990822221406.A80051@catkin.nothing-going-on.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sorry for my absence. The biggest problem is my poor English skills
not to be able to write and read long discussion like this.
And because of my job, I cannot spend much time for FreeBSD in
weekdays. As you know, currently under pre-freeze time for
3.3-RELEASE, and I have many patches to be reviewed and committed
before freeze.
From: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org>
> 1. LinuxDoc is dying. SGMLTools, the main 'wrapper' around it in the
> Linux world has switched to DocBook, and the Linux Documentation
> Project is moving towards it (although not as quickly as we have --
> this is mostly because we have less documentation to convert).
> 2. DocBook is a far better designed DTD. Yes, there's more to learn
> about it (which is why I wrote, and continue to write, the primer),
> but it's more extensible, more flexible and more widely supported.
> 3. DocBook as a DTD promotes consistency in the choice of markup. This
> is a good thing, as it (a) makes the job of marking things up easier,
> (b) allows more consistency in the output, giving a strong sense of
> 'family' between the documents, (c) prevents the author having to worry
> about what their document will look like, and instead concentrate on
> marking up their documentation accurately.
These things are technically true. But when many committers and
doc-submitters don't use emacs, more verbose self-described markup
language (like DocBook) makes difficult to write for them. Should we
(emacs users) consider them?
> 4. DocBook is a "richer" markup model, so our documents will be easier
> to downgrade to other markup models (like, for example, HTML, or
> PilotDoc).
As Satoshi said, HTML rendering for our handbook is not completed
yet. We should refine that before going to another work like
repository reorganization.
> > Also, the Japanese PS and PDF handbook generation is still broken
> > since the Linuxdoc -> Docbook switchover.
> It is? Define broken? I know that there were problems, but I was under
> the impression that Jun Kuriyama had fixed them, updated the port, and
> forwarded them on to Norm Walsh.
Yes, currently that is broken. teTeX cannot handle Japanese encoding
and jadetex also needs patches for Japanese TeX suite.
And I don't have Japanese handling specification in PDF. I think
dvi2ps and ps2pdf converter help us, but that seems more far stage...
> OK, seriously, for a moment: if you felt the need to write that then
> something has gone seriously wrong. I'd like to hear from the members
> of the Japanese Doc. Proj. (in private mail please, not withstanding the
> disclaimer at the start of this message, I don't think we need to subject
> -doc to the rest of this) so we can discuss this a little more slowly and
> a little more calmly. I mean no offense to you Satoshi, but until this
> little blow-up my contact with the Japanese translators was Jun Kuriyama,
> and he's been conspicuously absent from this thread.
So, everything in these thread (including ones in long ago) is too
speedy for me. And many things are decided before I can make spare
time for that discussion.
I want to walk more slowly in discussion and in Doc Project working.
I think many translation team have technical problem, but most of that is
local problem which should be solved in local mailing-list.
Of course, not saying like:
> Sorry, can we postpone this change please. We haven't got the manpower
> to dedicate to it right now.
is our fault. (but really I haven't saying that? :-) But I don't have
any idea for some technical problems, so I cannot say "please postpone
until <someday>." Can we say "please postpone" in these situation?
Hmmm. I took over 1 hour to write this mail and much sleepy. Can I
postpone to replying other comments? :-)
> PS: Oh, one more thing. I'm going to be over for FreeBSD Con. in
> October, and I understand that some of the Japanese translation
> team are going to be there as well -- could we maybe postpone this
> whole thing until we can sit down and talk about it face to face?
> I'm a lovely guy in person, willing to stand my own round of drinks,
> and I can probably bore you all with pictures of my girlfriend.
I'll go to FreeBSDCon, too. And Satoshi said he will there. I don't
know other person's plan...
> PPPS: OK, seriously for a moment again. "Jun Kuriyama". Am I right in
> using "Jun" in the same way other people would refer to me as "Nik",
> or have I got it backwards? I've asked about this before, but I
> think it got lost in the noise, and the last time the topic came up
> (on another mailing list as it happens) I don't recall any clear
> consensus -- thanks.
"Jun" is my first name, and "Kuriyama" is family name. So calling me
"Jun" is correct usage.
Jun Kuriyama // kuriyama@FreeBSD.org
// kuriyama@FreeBSD.ORG
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14273.33591.825261.22222V>