DocBook

[Sean]

On 21 Feb 2001, Ben Pfaff wrote:

> Sean <picasso@madflower.com> writes:
> 
> > On 21 Feb 2001, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > 
> > > You don't do this for *all* your documents?  To me, a "document"
> > > under Unix is a directory with a Makefile in it.  Object Linking
> > > and Embedding?  ActiveX?  Bah!  Just put in a copy of that .eps
> > > and add a \includegraphics or @image command or <IMG> tag or
> > > whatever.
> > 
> > Not to nitpick, but that is _precisely_ OLE.
> 
> Hmm?  Maybe in theory.  In practice OLE has numerous problems
> (admittedly, I haven't used it in many years):

I meant in theory (because I forgot thats what M$ called it), I think the
_best_ implementation I have seen is called OpenDoc. It requires various
editors to edit each type of format, however, they are independent of
each other. And not having a specific type of editor just means you can't
edit that section.. It was all manage under a framework, it is _kind_ of
like a cross between OLE and what PDF tries to do. Like you would have an
opendoc document, you could vieew the entire thing. Than if you wanted to
edit it, you would use your favourite wordprocessor "widget", if you
needed to add a graphic you could use like pshop or gimp, it embedded
nearly anything including movies, sounds, urls, spreadsheets , forms etc. 

> 
> In short, there is *no way* to do what GNU libavl does using OLE,
> at least not without extensive extra tools.

Probably not. 

> > The only downside is your way
> > doesnt pull up the proper editer for the embedded object. 
> 
> *shrug*  Such a feature only makes sense in a graphical
> environment anyhow.  I spend 99% of my time in Emacs at the
> console.  I can always type `C-x C-f e m b TAB RET' to pull up
> `embeddedobject.text'.

If your worried about how something looks, its a lot easier looking at it
in a Graphical enviroment to make sure it looks good rather than printing
it off and finding out it looks horrible. *shrugs* Matter of preference. 

> Then you're crazy.  PostScript and PDF are output formats.  You
> shouldn't recreate LaTeX in PostScript or PDF unless you're doing
> it just to prove that you can, like the guy who implemented bc in
> sed.

Only if I embed the Latex converter in the PS file. =)
I don't see any reason to use latex if I was just writing PS or PDF.. 
 
> > But instead I sit here working with a directory full of files wrestling
> > with an eps file that has a file embedded by linking that uses a font I
> > don't have. 
> 
> Well, of course there are problems if you fragment your
> documents.  What do you expect?

It wasnt by choice.