This is the mail archive of the
docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list .
Re: Overview of available editors
- From: Jens Emmerich <Jens dot Emmerich at encorus dot com>
- To: Trevor Jenkins <trevor dot jenkins at suneidesis dot com>
- Cc: Erik Leunissen <e dot leunissen at hccnet dot nl>, docbook-apps at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 11:20:50 +0200
- Subject: DOCBOOK-APPS: Re: Overview of available editors
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0204070117010.13881-100000@suneidesis.demon.co.uk>
Just a small addition
Trevor Jenkins <trevor.jenkins@suneidesis.com> writes:
> On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Erik Leunissen <e.leunissen@hccnet.nl> wrote:
>
> > ... interactive tools (GUI-based editors) that aim to help giving
> > structure to docbook documents.
> >
> > My primary interest concerns utilities runnning under Linux, but I'm
> > willing to switch to a windows tool if necessary.
>
> I just completed yesterday a 450 page manual using DocBook with emacs and
> the psgml package. I made extensive use of the fold element/unfold element
> features. This is with the latest emacs/psgml combination either. As I
> started with an older one I didn't want to disturb things during the
> project. Syntax colouring might have been useful but I didn't have time to
> experiment with sensible combinations; could only bill for the editing
> work.
I'd recommend the stuff under
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/docbook/contrib/tools/
(or equivalent direct cvs connection)
<advertisement>
I find the emacs/doctoc stuff extremely useful for quick navigation.
It reduces fold/unfold activities otherwise required to not get lost.
</advertisement>
Otherwise, with the stylesheets in tools/XMeTaL, XMeTaL seems a good
candidate if you don't need strict control over source code
formatting.
Jens