On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 06:07:20PM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote: > Patrice Dumas wrote: > > It is on purpose that CHECK_NORMAL_MENU_STRUCTURE is needed, because > > with manually made menus and node directions, it is not really possible > > to be sure that an irregular structure is not done on purpose. > > Are you serious about that? Reading an info file should not be an experience > like an adventure game, where each cave has an unknown number of hidden > entrances, or where you can leave a room through the EAST exit and enter > the next one through the SOUTH door.
Very serious. To me, if what is wanted is a book-like hierarchical structure, it is better to use sectioning commands, no explicit directions, and no menu (although for menu a way to specify a description independently of menu is still missing). Otherwise, the author should be free to use whatever structure is best for the manual. There is an example of a test manual based on the guide/topic structure as used in Mallard (http://projectmallard.org/). This is a sensible organisation for a manual, but it does not follow the hierarchical tree. > It's good that it's still possible to get this warning. But for my feeling > it's way too hidden behind the bars of customization variables. > > How about adding an option '--validate' to makeinfo? Its effect - at least > in 'info' mode - should be to enable this CHECK_NORMAL_MENU_STRUCTURE > variable. For the reasons stated above, I do not think that it is needed much, if following the tree structure, the trend is that there should not be explicit directions right now, and no menus in the future, but that's more Gavin call. Regarding the name, it cannot be --validate, as it is not the reverse of --no-validate. -- Pat
