Re: New .texi file

[Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>]

Juri Linkov wrote:

   For example, the Autotype manual should be placed also into this new
   Emacs-X manual since Autotype is the only manual that doesn't describe
   a separate package.

I personally do not believe so.  The idea is that the main source of
information about Emacs is the Emacs manual.  (Or the Elisp manual for
Elisp programmers.)  Then comes browsing packages using `C-h p' and
browsing user options using Custom.  Then any collection of features
that logically can be grouped into something large and coherent enough
can get their own manual.  There are things that are not suitably
covered by any of these categories.  They are too small to motivate
all the extra work one has to do (and extra know-how one may have to
acquire) to commit a new manual rather than just add nodes to a
pre-existing manual.  Also, if one would get too many of such
"micro-manuals", then they would also unnecessarily clutter the user's
dir file.  (A problem that is already bad enough right now.)  That is
what the new manual is intended for.

Sections 1-8 of Autotype essentially cover things related to the
skeleton machinery.  Sections 9-12 look somewhat out of place, but not
too badly.  Sections 11-12 refer to `Commentary' sections for more
details.  Section 10 probably should too.  It is not the intended
purpose of the new manual to duplicate information obtainable through
`C-h p'.

Sincerely,

Luc.