I agree that Doxygen is intended more for C++, while docbook is for general
purposes. Docbook's semantics are a little too hard at the beginning, and
you do need many elements for "daily use". As nobody, i assume, has done
real content from scratch for the Haiku Book (there have been discussions
about naming it "the Haiku Book", how the structure should be handled, where
and who should do it, how long should be wait, who would have access to the
repository when it is made, but there is no real article, chapter or
section), you can propose Doxygen.
Back when the first discussion was made, DocBook was "the" documentation way
to go. Now there are several alternatives. I even remember that, at least
for the development, the wiki was proposed to be used. It has been used for
end-user documentation on the official Haiku wiki, and it has some progress.
But the Haiku Book, as wisely Axel Dörfler once said, is not for anyone for
contribute. (I have been learning C++ in order to help and know what am i
talking about... not only documentation usability was needed)
If you are writing new documentation for Haiku, i will be more than glad to
follow whatever decision made. If you were planning to format the BeBook or
any modification to it, let me remember the copyright around it. Michael
Phipps warned this to the original documentation team. As result, that team
went to stand-by and wait for the project would be more real, so we could
point the differences and similitudes between the Be API and the Haiku one.
Also, the Haiku Book has to comply to more specifications than the original
BeBook: it has to tell more than just the description of the API.
If there is already something for the new Haiku Book, please let me contact
you, so i can enroll for this task. Thank you.
Miguel Zúñiga
