Re: Docs format
"Franz Fritsche " <Franz.Fritsche@simple-line.de> writes:
> Hi all!
>
> > And if we are limited to tex and html, we can get nice print outs, and poor
> > web sites, but no form in which we can read it on a simple text terminal
> > without a browser.
> >
> Hmmm... I just try to figure out when I was forced to work solely on
> a simple text terminal (without browser - lynx or so...!!!)... ;-)))
It is my opinion that texinfo is much better than HTML. The "info"
program for viewing .info files is much more advanced than lynx, and
the info mode of emacs is wonderful. Printed texinfo documentes are a
dream compared to printed HTML. I also, personally, feel that texinfo
is easier to author than HTML.
> > texinfo is not only the GNU format, it also has a decent viewer, and
> > converts nicely to all sort of formats.
> >
> I think these are important points... I -as a web designer an
> promoter of the "internet idea" (information distribution)- of course
> prefer HTML as a distribution media... ;-)))
I think authoring documentation in texinfo is better for "information
distribution" becase it is so easy to convert texinfo into different
formats, including HTML. However, converting HTML is a bit of a
pain -- to say the least.
> But distribution is not the same thing as usage for technical
> (documentation) purposes... [I think]
texinfo is the MASTER of distrbution!
Matt
Reply to: