On 11/25/2016 01:05 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Maybe in your argument, but then abandoning Info makes much less sense
to me. Inventing yet another specialized format and coding yet
another specialized reader means repeating the Info experience over
again, i.e. we didn't learn anything from the cu
Hello,
> On Nov 25, 2016, at 04:00, Gavin Smith wrote:
>
> On 24 November 2016 at 19:55, Assaf Gordon wrote:
>> one minor annoyance that stems from the "info" format: the references
>> (@ref/@xref/@pxref).
>
> As Eli said, the main problem with the above is the printed output,
[...]
Perhaps
On 11/25/2016 03:46 AM, Norbert Preining wrote:
I have a good computer but use the normal info program regularly in contrast to
the Emacs info mode.
As do I. But would you have a problem if the implementation of the info program
were replaced with a simple driver that just processes the com
If in a Texinfo input file I have
@cindex --wuh
@findex --wuh
in the DocBook output, this becomes
–wuh
–wuh
We see that the index test is identical. However, in the source code
in DocBook.pm, the '_index_entry' function, there's the following
line:
$self->{'document_context'}->[-1]->{'mono
I have a good computer but use the normal info program regularly in contrast to
the Emacs info mode.
--
PREINING Norbert + TeX Live & Debian Developer + http://www.preining.info
GPG: 0x860CDC13 fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13
On 25 November 2016 at 07:27, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Per Bothner
>> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:34:38 -0800
>> Cc: Texinfo
>>
>> > When writing a manual and using references, they are rendered differently
>> > in each format (info/html/pdf).
>>
>> The emacs info mode does a better job with
> From: Per Bothner
> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 23:25:00 -0800
> Cc: Texinfo
>
> > The goodness of the job depends on the criteria. The info executable
> > typically fits in 250k; the emacs executable may not fit in 5M
> > when present.
>
> And why do you care? 5M is peanuts these days.
A runnin
> Cc: bug-texinfo@gnu.org
> From: Per Bothner
> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:25:08 -0800
>
> > I don't think it's a good idea. Emacs is a relatively large package,
> > and likely to not be installed on some systems, like the current
> > mobile computers/phones. the Emacs Info reader is for users w
On 25 November 2016 at 06:53, Ineiev wrote:
>> The emacs info mode does a better job with references, so they look more
>> like they would in html.
>> This is true even if you run emacs in a terminal (with the -nw flag).
>>
>> This is another reason to replace the info program with a wrapper roun
On 24 November 2016 at 19:55, Assaf Gordon wrote:
> one minor annoyance that stems from the "info" format: the references
> (@ref/@xref/@pxref).
>
> When writing a manual and using references, they are rendered differently in
> each format (info/html/pdf).
>
> The texinfo manual even warns:
>
>
On 11/24/2016 11:27 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
From: Per Bothner
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:34:38 -0800
Cc: Texinfo
When writing a manual and using references, they are rendered differently in
each format (info/html/pdf).
The emacs info mode does a better job with references, so they look m
On 11/24/2016 11:24 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
From: Per Bothner
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:28:39 -0800
Cc: Texinfo
I would also add, as a needed, independent project:
* Change the standalone info program to a wrapper around 'emacs -nw'.
I don't think it's a good idea. Emacs is a relatively
12 matches
Mail list logo
