Python documentation in DocBook

[DaveP]

Michael Hudson <mwh at python.net> wrote in 
news:m2y98g82li.fsf at python.net:

> Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> writes:
> 
>> You might be right.  Maybe the question to ask first, then, is
>> "Is there any reason why the Python documentation *should not*
>> be converted to DocBook?"
> 
> Well, people who contribute to the docs currently know latex, more 
or
> less by defintion.  I have to know latex professionally and have no
> interest in learning docbook, so if the documentation format 
changes,
> I'm that much less likely/able to contribute to it.
> 
> This is obviously a chicken-and-egg sort of answer, but it's 
probably
> a valid point.


Is there a source form example of the py docs,
and perhaps a statement of what is required of the processing?
E.g. Martin said earlier:

The current Python documentation contains a lot of Python-specific
mark-up, which is important for all processing (the LaTeX 
environments
classdesc, funcdesc, methoddesc, memberdesc, excdesc, datadesc,
productionlist, ctypedesc, cvardesc, seealso, ...; the TeX commands
\versionadded, \versionchanged, \function, \var, \class, \exception,
\cfunction, \optional, \deprecated, \platform, \seerfc, ...)

Any new format should preserve this markup, which still being easy to
edit and process. DocBook does not clearly meet these needs.




  Just to take a look at producing docbook from that,
and to see if XML/XSLT/XSL-FO processing chain could do the job 
please?

regards DaveP