[Sugar-devel] [Localization] Documentation [WAS: Re: Help activity]

[Seth Woodworth]

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:45 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org> wrote:

> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 21:47, Sayamindu Dasgupta <sayamindu at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > [Jumping into the discussion midway]:
> >
> > From an l10n point of view, I would highly recommend adopting (and
> > perhaps extending) the GNOME documentation framework. It is docbook
> > based, which is a format pretty easy to pick up (and I believe
> > OpenOffice.org can also export to docbook - though I have never tried
> > it out).
>
> Well, I think it was a decision by the people who wrote the manual to
> use floss manuals, I guess it would be up to them which tool they use.
> And in the same way, translators would choose the tools that best suit
> them. I think that floss manuals has already tools for translation and
> also think that people have worked on a translation to spanish, Maybe
> we should ask to those people which was their experience with the
> floss manuals tool set?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tomeu
>


The difference AFAIK was that FM offered pretty strong print-ability as a
wiki-pdf solution.  They also have a very reasonable WYSIWYG editor on their
twiki.  Does the GNOME doc framework support this? I haven't explored it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20090529/fc202a9a/attachment.htm