From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: HTML-Info design Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 01:16:38 +0100 Message-ID: <87k31hc36h.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87388bnzha.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <87k31mdbhe.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87tx0qiv45.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87h9wqd3i5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87h9wqimf0.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87y4q1fekv.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87fvc858c6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87ioh4nf8k.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <83y4pzptpx.fsf@gnu.org> <871tnr1gqo.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <83bnmvowdb.fsf@gnu.org> <83ppbanqhe.fsf@gnu.org> <87vbl2xigp.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> <83ioh2nlow.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1419380693 7283 80.91.229.3 (24 Dec 2014 00:24:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 00:24:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen@xemacs.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Nic Ferrier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 24 01:24:43 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3Zko-00086g-SH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 01:24:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46687 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3Zko-0003Um-3g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:24:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44539) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3Zkb-0003UD-A2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:24:30 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3Zka-0006CM-ER for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:24:29 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:60144) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3Zka-0006CH-BI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:24:28 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39080 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3ZkP-0002xj-O5; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:24:17 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4593CE0473; Wed, 24 Dec 2014 01:16:38 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <83ioh2nlow.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 23 Dec 2014 22:41:19 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:180611 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > We are talking about replacing an existing browser, one that is > developed for decades and is chock-full of useful features. Not really. It's pretty much the same since it was developed first. Indexing and search have admittedly been polished quite a bit in the last 10 years. Though it's not as much the indexing that has been polished but rather Emacs completion in general. Images have been added and happen to work fast and well in Emacs info though not anywhere else. The Info file format is bland and has not been changed over a long time, formatting of links is incoherent and unpredictable, paragraph formatting around @example tends to be inconsistent and so on. Navigation and display is instantaneous and good, the results are as readable as one would expect from an editor specializing on working with texts. That's all, but it's essential. It doesn't suck where it counts, and for some reason that's not what the HTML browsing based universe has managed so far. And the browsers _have_, in contrast to Info, been actively developed for decades. And yet I could not name a single thing in which they are significantly better than the first browsers let loose on the HTML from Texinfo were. For M-x info RET, I could name probably half a dozen things. That's pitiful, but less pitiful than none. -- David Kastrup