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

Re: HTML instead of GNU Info?

On Sun, Jun 13, 1999 at 19:45:30 +0200, Anders Arnholm wrote:
> The big problem with texi, and to some extent the current SGML-DTD's are
> that there are no easy way to extract a nice looking correct man page. Man
> is still the best and i.m.h.o fastest way to get a overview of the options
> in a program.

There is a big difference between reference documentation (i.e. where you
can look up things you mostly know already ("what was the switch to get foo
to fnurble?"); and tutorial documentation ("What is foo, and how do I start
using it?"): compare the "bison" manpage to the "bison" info documentation.

Reference documentation leans itself to a strong, fixed structure (title,
summary, options etc.), like the man format uses.

Tutorial documentation seldomly has such a fixed structure, and a less rigid
format (like texi and an SGML DTD like DocBook) is desirable for it.

It is possible to impose a stricter structure to a part of an otherwise less
rigid documentation format, and use that structure for automatic extraction
for manpages.

With texinfo, there is a convention to have a "invoking" or "invocation"
node that lists the options, so "info <program> invo" brings you to an
option summary in many cases.

UNFAIR  Term applied to advantages enjoyed by other people which we tried 
to cheat them out of and didn't manage. See also DISHONESTY, SNEAKY, 
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan  

Reply to: