Re: HTML instead of GNU Info?
On Sunday 20 June 1999, at 11 h 59, the keyboard of Sarel Botha
<sjb@dundee.lia.net> wrote:
> I haven't been using *nix for that long so I haven't played with all the
> document formats before, but isn't there one document type that has ALL the
> features of the others?
If you invent it and implement it, I vote for you at the next Turing award
session :-)
Any other nominee?
> What I'm thinking is to use that format in all
> packages. When you install the system you choose which formats you want to be
> 'compiled', like info, man and html, then if you want to print something it
> compiles a texi (or whatever prints pretty).
SGML is probably the most serious in that respect but it suffers from the lack of tools (specially free tools), the lack of documentation, its undecipherable nature, the non-distributable specification, etc.
XML will may be solve these problems. May be. Should we rewrite our documentation in XML/DocBk now? Because, even if *we* do, we'll still have the problems of the programs we package. (I maintain a package whose only documentation is in MS-Word's '.doc' format.)
Reply to: