On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:37:10AM +0000, Karl Berry wrote: > What about just Texinfo, or Texinfo-as-sexps? > > If it works, why not? Stefan, would this work? > > These days, as I keep repeating to no apparent effect, another viable -- > as far as I can see, the best -- approach is use the Texinfo XML output > as your input. This XML is an essentially complete representation of > the input, but without the Texinfo syntax and option peculiarities, as > described above.
(As a disclaimer, I only have a very basic knowledge of lisp or s-exprs.) Maybe another possibility would be to have an intermediate representation of Texinfo as a data s-expression, which would be generated by makeinfo and further processed by emacs/guile or any program that likes s-expressions. That's something we discussed a bit with Andy in the GHM in Paris. There hasn't been much progress on that front, but I believe this would be fairly easy to do once somebody tells me what the sexprs for a Texinfo tree should look like. Then this representation could either be shipped just like we ship the info files, or maybe cached --- since generating it takes quite a bit of time --- such that the rendering may be done rather quickly. The sexpr would be very similar with the generated XML in terms of information embedded. -- Pat
