Hi Daniel, Daniel Egger <degger@xxxxxxx> writes: > I'd rather we simply render the XML directly because the mapping is > tricky at two points: You want us to include an XML renderer in the help-browser? That doesn't sound like a simple solution. > - The XML-transformation needs to be taught about creating files > with a fixed name. This bit us before with SGML and is even more > tricky with the DocBook/XML stylesheets. What is tricky about 'xsltproc $xmlfile > $htmlfile'? OK, I have to admit I don't much experience with the DocBook XML issues you encountered when working on gimp-help but since I played with this stuff for developer.gimp.org I cannot follow this argument. Perhaps I need to take a closer look at gimp-help2 first... > - The docs need to be kept in sync with the GIMP Source which is a > tedious work. How would your solution avoid this problem? > I don't think we have enough manpower to get the help done in > time. I've a business to run, have no idea where syngin is and it > seems we still have no content writers. My guesstimate for efforts > we'd need to put into it would be >400h to get something which is > showable. But I would perhaps make sense to setup the framework and encourage people to contribute help for gimp-2.0. We could setup some text that is displayed for all missing pages and that explicitely encourages people to write help on this topic. Sven
