Transition to Mallard?

[Kyle Nitzsche]

A significant disadvantage is that only yelp can display Mallard (now) 
and not all customized Ubuntu versions necessarily use Yelp. This means 
that your great doc contributions may not be available in all cases. 
Content format should not dictate the display application or else there 
are significant potential limitations not all of which can be understood 
in advance.

My view is that an LTS release is the wrong time to undertake this.

I think there should be a serious look at doing it post Lucid.

Cheers,
Kyle

Phil Bull wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I think that now is a good time to talk about whether we should migrate
> over to Mallard this release cycle. Here's my appraisal:
>
> ADVANTAGES
>
>       * Simpler syntax than DocBook, easier for new contributors, nicer
>         for existing ones.
>       * Highly modular. Should be easier to maintain in a topic-based
>         manner.
>       * Novel linking model. Pages link themselves into the structure.
>         No need to maintain linking pages like the main page, or to
>         heavily patch new material into the structure (should be nice
>         for OEMs).
>       * Well-supported by upstream. GNOME docs will soon be in this
>         format and we can be involved in shaping its further
>         development.
>       * Better navigation. Links have captions. Breadcrumb bar. Easier
>         for users to find things.
>       * It's a new feature. People like new features :)
>
> DISADVANTAGES
>
>       * Requires modifications to the toolchain. I don't know how
>         smoothly we can do this. For example, can we get Mallard and
>         Rosetta working together nicely before release?
>       * The conversion would take quite a lot of work, distracting from
>         writing new documentation.
>       * People will need to learn how to write Mallard documents.
>       * Would be going into an LTS release so would require extra
>         testing.
>       * Support is still young. There could be serious bugs that we
>         haven't seen yet.
>
> I think that the advantages, both to us and our users, significantly
> outweigh the disadvantages. The Mallard workflow, and the results that
> you get, are far superior to what we have now. It would solve a lot of
> problems. I'm confident that we can do the initial conversion in a
> couple of weeks. The toolchain issues would require further research,
> but I don't think that they're insurmountable.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
>
>