RFC: Source-markup language for GHC User's Guide
Edward Z. Yang
ezyang at mit.edu
Tue Oct 7 15:25:33 UTC 2014
I personally don't have a problem writing Docbook, and one problem
with moving to lightweight markup is it becomes a bit harder to
keep your markup semantic.
Excerpts from Herbert Valerio Riedel's message of 2014-10-07 09:20:43 -0600:
> Hello GHC Developers & GHC User's Guide writers,
> I assume it is common knowledge to everyone here, that the GHC User's
> Guide is written in Docbook XML markup.
> However, it's a bit tedious to write Docbook-XML by hand, and the XML
> markup is not as lightweight as modern state-of-the-art markup languages
> designed for being edited in a simple text-editor are.
> Therefore I'd like to hear your opinion on migrating away from the
> current Docbook XML markup to some other similarly expressive but yet
> more lightweight markup documentation system such as Asciidoc or
> There's obviously some cost involved upfront for a (semi-automatic)
> conversion. So one important question is obviously whether the
> long-term benefits outweight the cost/investment that we'd incur for the
> initial conversion.
> All suggestions/comments/worries welcome; please commence brainstorming :)
> : http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/
> : http://sphinx-doc.org/
> : There's automatic conversion tools to aid (though manual cleanup
> is still needed) the initial conversion, such as
> As an example, here's the conversion of
> to Asciidoc:
> to give an idea how XML compares to Asciidoc
More information about the ghc-devs