On 07/18/2015 07:28 AM, Arthur Schwarz wrote:
Let me hazard that if Texinfo was replaced by HTML then most, if not all,
the Texinfo goals would be satisfied, to wit, a means to make the documents
widely available and many computers and operating systems. a formalized
language, and tools to convert to other presentation formats, including
Texinfo I would mention. Plus HTML can produce a much, much more attractive
display.
But Texinfo can produce HTML. Producing other formats (including good-looking
PDF)
from HTML is difficult and would requires a disciplined (and tedious) style of
HTML.
HTML is low-level and verbose. It doesn't help with indexing and has limited
support for cross-references, sectioning, or definitions.
Without lauding the advantages of HTML over Texinfo let me say that if
Texinfo were more like HTML the Texinfo goals would be reached, as a
minimum, and the produced documents would be much more appealing.
That is almost certainly wrong.
It might help you to think of texinfo as kin to Markdown, but with extra
features
helpful for programming documentation, longer sectioned documents, and
printed output. As such it is it quite modern and practical.
When the texinfo tool chain fails IMO is the use of the generated info format,
the one you see in Emacs info mode or the standalone 'info' application.
This format should be replaced by HTML - but now we're talking about HTML
as a generated format, not a source format. I don't think anyone objects in
principle, but someone needs to do the work to modify the tools and workflow
to work with HTML. One idea is to write a new emacs 'info mode' that is hybrid
between the existing info mode (for the keybindings and interface, as well as
backward compatibility) and eww mode (for the parsing of HTML and the
rendering).
But unless some does the actual work, it's pointless to complain.
--
--Per Bothner
p...@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
