[OpenAFS-Doc] Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: SPAM-LOW: RE: [OpenAFS] Documetation for asetkey and aklog

[Steven Jenkins]

Ken Hornstein wrote:
> This illustrates _exactly_ my feelings about documentation formats.
> Basically, I don't give a shit about 90% of the worthless crap that
> these systems do (yeah, I'm going to be writing a WHOLE LOT of theorems
> in the Kerberos FAQ); what I want is a simple layout that looks
> [remainder of rant deleted]

Three points:

1. My message was information and an offer of help. It wasn't even a 
recommendation. If you don't want it, don't take it. You don't need to 
unload a bunch of attitude on me.

2. The theorem example was just that, an example. Would you be less 
annoyed if the roles were FAQ-specific stuff like 'question' and 
'answer'? With a little work, the subset of DocBook you'd have to know 
would be *tiny*, and the subset of LaTeX you'd have to know would be *zero*.

3. The lesson that logical markup is better than visual has only been 
learned ten gazillion times. If you're happy with HTML markup, great. 
But it's not like this is an open question.

Steve