Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:24057
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060609132442.03b41010@zend.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 13:25:46 -0700
To: "Steph Fox" <steph@zend.com>,"Nuno Lopes" <nlopess@php.net>,
	"Andrei Zmievski" <andrei@gravitonic.com>
Cc: <helly@php.net>,"Derick Rethans" <derick@php.net>,
	<internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <17e201c68c01$4c0d8c10$6602a8c0@foxbox>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060608162444.06db8390@zend.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.62.0606090824510.21800@localhost>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20060609065445.0371fe28@zend.com>
	<35340f912d5d4405f2da5183d804f165@gravitonic.com>
	<008d01c68bfe$1bc02890$0100a8c0@pc07653>
	<17e201c68c01$4c0d8c10$6602a8c0@foxbox>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] SPL docs
From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans)

Hey,

I'm obviously not an expert on this stuff so I don't have much added 
value to add. However, I think from a high-level I think it's 
important that we have one PHP manual and that the manual covers both 
functional and oo extensions. I think the last thing we want is to 
have several PHP manuals.
My $.02. Now I'll shut up :)

Andi

At 01:14 PM 6/9/2006, Steph Fox wrote:
>Hi Nuno,
>
>Christian Weiske and myself have both done quite a lot with docbook 
>- mostly extending the PHP-GTK dtd and forcing the (fairly elderly 
>but much-altered) stylesheets to do all sorts of horrible things 
>they weren't designed to do :). The same goes for James Moore if 
>he's around at all, and of course Goba (if he's around, ditto).  I 
>don't know how much any of us (other than Goba) could sensibly be 
>called 'specialist', but we've a fair idea of how it all works between us.
>
>Talking with Sebastian and Marcus about their plans a couple of 
>weeks ago, though, I came away with the distinct impression that a 
>docbook-centred solution wasn't what they're hoping for. I think it 
>would be a smart move to agree on the kind(s) of documentation that 
>will be acceptable for PHP OO before we start trying to actually 
>work with other groups to create it. (And probably not on the 
>internals list, those poor inboxes have had their fill of mail from me today.)
>
>- Steph
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Nuno Lopes" <nlopess@php.net>
>To: "Andrei Zmievski" <andrei@gravitonic.com>; "Andi Gutmans" <andi@zend.com>
>Cc: <helly@php.net>; "Derick Rethans" <derick@php.net>; 
><internals@lists.php.net>
>Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:51 PM
>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] SPL docs
>
>
>>The problem is always maintenance.. I've have some knowledge about 
>>DSSSL but none about XSL. In phpdoc we use both, that need to be 
>>kept in sync, so that's always complicated to make changes.
>>The best option would be to create a "work-group" to study with 
>>docbook creators the best approaches to OOP. Again, the problem is 
>>that we don't have any specialist in docbook. We work with 
>>recipes/templates, that are in a wiki, which are changed twice in a decade :)
>>
>>Nuno
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>>PHP-GTK has been using modified docbook for its stuff...
>>>
>>>http://gtk.php.net/manual/en/classtree.php
>>>
>>>-Andrei
>>>
>>>On Jun 9, 2006, at 6:55 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>>>
>>>>Maybe we can get a volunteer to improve the docbook?
>>>>
>>>>At 11:25 PM 6/8/2006, Derick Rethans wrote:
>>>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, Andi Gutmans wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Any chance we can get the SPL docs integrated into the PHP manual? I
>>>>> > get questions about it here and there and think that as it's in the
>>>>> > default PHP distro it makes sense to have that as part of the
>>>>>official
>>>>> > PHP manual.
>>>>>
>>>>>There is no way we can do that as the docbook stuff's OO support is
>>>>>well, quite minimal.
>>>>>
>>>>>regards,
>>>>>Derick
>>
>>--
>>PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>>To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
>>__________ NOD32 1.1380 (20060125) Information __________
>>
>>This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>>http://www.eset.com
>>