parser update...

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Wed Mar 8 10:28:38 PST 2006

Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> BTW Gerard was thinking of restructuring the book to LaTEX format... 
> Whoa.  Where did this come from.  Its the first I've heard of it.

hehe one step at a time. This has been on my mind for a number of years 
actually. I just haven't persued it yet. I've always prefered a TeX 
environment over XML/XSL especially for printing and publishing 
purposes. If the LFS book will ever be converted to some TeX variant or 
it ends up being a conversion target in the Makefile file...who knows. 
It may or may not happen.

> In any case, a TeX based book would lose a *lot* of the metadata that
> are in the books now.  Besides, TeX is about rendering.  The idea behind
> docbook is to separate appearance from content--something like Knuth's
> tangle and weave paradigm.  Docbook is the correct tool for LFS.

Which is why a conversion hasn't been a high priority. It's just a 
thought I'm playing with when I have time.

I've never agreed with the idea that XML is the right tool for writing a 
book. Updating it is pain too with all the XML tags you need to weave 
into it. But then again, *TeX doesn't fix that either as it has its own 
set of editing annoyances when it comes to editing.

Anyway, don't even worry about (La)TeX for LFS. I only brought it up as 
an idle thought I had.

Gerard Beekmans

/* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list