Re: Windows CHM format for the documents
От | |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Windows CHM format for the documents |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 002001c37a53$b1e3b3b0$152ca8c0@visiomode1 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Windows CHM format for the documents (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
> - The current usage allows people to work on documents as files, using > whatever editing tools they like. With your "server software," that > is lost. Yes, it is harder to use any tool for editing (though not impossible,copy/paste could be used :-). There are benefits from using the same tool too - the output will probably look the same throughout the document. The central server idea emphasizes this even more I think ... and the programmatically (sp?) :-) > - Current usage uses CVS to manage changes. This allows changes to be > looked at and approved/rejected/modified. I haven't any idea if > your system uses text files in behind, it sounds like not. Creating some of the CVS features wouldn't be a problem at all. For example storing certain situations (labeling) would be a good idea (of course the current backuping could be used for this as well). > - Current usage does not mandate that anyone have a synchronous > connection to a central server that becomes bottleneck / vulnerable > point. Yes, well, nowadays most people have fixed lines (in the future more so), I wouldn't count this a big drawback. > The apparent "benefit" of your tool is that it provides a tool with a > user interface that slavishly follows the Windows "CHM file" viewer. > That may be an advantage to those that want to slavishly follow > Windows development/deployment "standards," but I daresay you're NOT > in a community that is particularly interested in that sort of thing. I'm far away from favoring any particular OS. Personally I have done more Unix/Linux development than Windows. But as long as this shouldn't be an OS war forum, I think all OSs pretty much suck at some things, and are good at others. CHM is only one choice for output, and besides it's not only for Windows. http://xchm.sourceforge.net/ there's a CHM viewer for Linux. There are more similar kinds of viewers with slightly different file format, but they do the same. I think that CHM has its advantages and I like using them. I'm fine if you want to use your tools, and sorry if I bothered you...It was just an option that I presented and you have given some good feedback of it. Ilkka
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: