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: On being web-friendly and why info must die Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 22:44:58 +0100 Message-ID: <87zjb0mp0l.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <20141205123549.GA29331@thyrsus.com> <87mw72lyzs.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <20141205190925.GA5067@thyrsus.com> <871tod241v.fsf@ktab.red-bean.com> <20141205212111.GB7784@thyrsus.com> <87d27xn3jh.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <87vblpp1le.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <877fy4h5r8.fsf@earlgrey.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1417902313 29952 80.91.229.3 (6 Dec 2014 21:45:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2014 21:45:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Christopher Allan Webber Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 06 22:45:08 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 1XxNA4-0003lM-9x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 22:45:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55701 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxNA3-00076a-Nk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:45:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57548) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxN9x-00076D-9m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:45:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxN9w-0002de-66 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:45:01 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:55284) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxN9w-0002dY-2b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:45:00 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34225 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxN9v-0002pA-7U; Sat, 06 Dec 2014 16:44:59 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B54A0DF2A7; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 22:44:58 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <877fy4h5r8.fsf@earlgrey.lan> (Christopher Allan Webber's message of "Sat, 06 Dec 2014 14:37:57 -0600") 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:179215 Archived-At: Christopher Allan Webber writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> Christopher Allan Webber writes: >> >>> Eric S. Raymond writes: >>> >>>> Karl Fogel : >>>>> Actually, I think that might be *more* important than the exact choice >>>>> of markup language. I hope we don't bikeshed.com the choice of markup >>>>> language to death. ${ANYTHING_STANDARD_OR_ORG} is fine by me. >>>> >>>> Agreed. I may have given the impression that I'm more attached to >>>> asciidoc per se than I am. It would be my first choice, but a reasoned >>>> case could be made for a couple of the others. >>> >>> Okay, sorry also that I may be responding to that a bit more than >>> anything. Getting GNU's web documentation improved is an important >>> issue to me, and I really do want this to happen. >>> >>> I do agree that the importance of good web documentation is more >>> important than info support, and if somehow we got tossed into the fork >>> of needing to pick one or the other, I think nice looking web >>> documentation is more important to the long-term health of GNU. >> >> So tell me what you consider wrong with the Texinfo-generated web >> documentation of GNU LilyPond, arbitrary stuff like >> . >> What parts of the documentation are "not nice looking" to a degree that >> would be bad for LilyPond's long-term health? > > I think it's a big step up from most Texinfo exports, and while I think > it doesn't look as nice as a default sphinx export, it's proof that > Texinfo could be improved to be attractive enough to web users who want > to view the manual. Well yes, the question is what one can do to make the typical Texinfo-generated manuals and pages be more palatable. Of course, the amount of images in them is up to the manual writers, but it might become easier to generate them. -- David Kastrup