RFC: Source-markup language for GHC User's Guide
carter.schonwald at gmail.com
Wed Oct 8 21:40:54 UTC 2014
does asciidoc have a formal grammar/syntax or whatever? i'm trying to look
up one, but can't seem to find it.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvriedel at gmail.com>
> On 2014-10-08 at 10:49:33 +0200, Jan Stolarek wrote:
> >> 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
> >> ReST/Sphinx.
> > My opinion is that I don't really care. I only edit the User Guide
> > once every couple of months or so. I don't have problems with Docbook
> > but if others want something else I can adjust.
> I'd argue, that casual contributions may benefit significantly from
> switching to a more human-friendly markup, as my theory is that it's
> much easier to pick-up a syntax that's much closer to plain-text rather
> than a fully-fledged Docbook XML. With a closer-to-plain-text syntax you
> can more easily focus on the content you want to write rather than being
> distracted by the incidental complexity of writing low-level XML markup.
> Or put differently, I believe or rather hope this may lower the
> barrier-to-entry for casual User's Guide contributions.
> Fwiw, I stumbled over the slide-deck (obviously dogfooded in Asciidoc)
> which tries to make the point that Asciidoc helps you focus more on
> writing content rather than fighting with the markup, including a
> comparision of the conciseness of a chosen example of Asciidoc vs. the
> resulting Docbook XML it is converted into.
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ghc-devs