Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: "Newbie-ized help"

[Zenaan Harkness]

> But on the topic of HTML as in *info-style* documentation supplement:
> Speaking personally, I believe that would be fine.  I already use the
> 'pinfo' browser for info, which basically simulates Lynx for info
> files (since I am not an Emacs type).

Standard debian packages I install on a box are:
apt-get install lynx pinfo dwww info2www

Info happens to convert quite nicely to html...

> Before *I* would go ahead with adding a per-command HTML help system,

There's nothing wrong with info.

And if you're really keen, original sources in Docbook, for a single
command line away from info, html, rtf, pdf, etc, output.

But info2www is then all we need here - giving pinfo, emacs and Mozilla
equal status in terms of doco access. What more could you ask for?

> though, I'd like to see some effort made to get a de facto centralised
> HTML help system, like 'man' and 'info'.  (Probably more like 'info'
> given that info is hyperlinked while man is not.)

Strongly agree. For doco that you want to be both command line help, as
well as html, info truly rocks!

And did I mention Docbook is quite a comprehensive source format :)

> This means that a simple command, e.g. 'docs tla', would take you to
> the HTML documentation index page for that command, much like 'info
> make', say.  This seems the most standardised way to deliver useful
> per-program HTML docs:  A standard (maybe distro-dependent) place to
> put them; a standard way to access them.

Excellent.

Thanks
Zen