RE: HTML instead of GNU Info? -> XML would be better
At 09:41 PM 7/10/99 -0700, you wrote:
>
><<<<
>From: Craig Sanders [mailto:cas@taz.net.au]
>
>On Sat, Jul 10, 1999 at 02:18:57PM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
>> > With HTML you've got to start a browser and to search HTML, you
>> > need a web server with CGI and glimpse or suchlike. And there's no
>> > cursor to put on it for dictionary/man lookups or paste-ins. Thus,
>> > HTML is much less conveinient, and inferior, IMO. Yes, `info'
>> > could be made to look nicer on the screen... on a GUI. Many of us
>> > need both X11 and terminal access to manuals.
>
>anyway: provide both formats if possible, otherwise provide the most
>"source-like" format from which other formats can be generated (for info
>docs, this means texinfo rather than info).
>>>>>
>
>Ultimately this problem should be addressed with an XML DTD which
>encompasses the needs of both formats.
Why? Sure, you can replace texinfo with XML, but it will still need
converted into html and Postscript. As it is, texinfo is close enough to
TeX and info to make it easy to convert, and all the tools are there.
Changing into XML seems a lot of work for little to no benefit.
--
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org (alternately dvdeug@hotmail.com)
"I would weep, but my tears have been stolen; I would shout, but my voice
has been taken. Thus, I write." - Tragic Poet
Reply to: