[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: On being web-friendly and why info must die

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: On being web-friendly and why info must die
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 15:49:32 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0

Óscar Fuentes wrote:

Some formats (like Org) are "final", in the sense that the source text
(the equivalent of *.texi) is intended for consumption (it is the *.info
too, although not as pretty as some of its other representations such as
HTML.) Failures on the structure are visible, links can be checked right
away, etc.

This is an advantage of Org mode over Texinfo.

3. checking the resulting document in terms of clarity, completeness,
    style, etc. *must* be done by someone who is not the author.

It's certainly better to have a non-author also check appearance and style. But this doesn't affect the point that it's better when the author can check these things easily too, right away when writing the change. Right now, though, Texinfo 5 is making it unnecessarily hard for Emacs documentation authors to check their work.

Besides, we need to be realistic: we don't have an army of documentation developers and we're unlikely to gain one while our doc tools are more awkward than they need to be. If we stick with our current development process this problem will likely just fester.

Would it be reasonable to pick one part of the Emacs manual -- doc/misc/org.texi, say -- and convert it to Org mode? The idea is to see how well Org mode would work for representing all of the Emacs documentation, and perhaps we can convert it one manual at a time rather than trying to do it all at once.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]