From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Robert J. Chassell" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New files url.texi and org.texi Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:21:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200412080412.iB84CUP06430@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200412122000.iBCK0n418370@raven.dms.auburn.edu> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1103034212 19152 80.91.229.6 (14 Dec 2004 14:23:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:23:32 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 14 15:23:20 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CeDaC-0000C3-00 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:23:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CeDkL-0001wI-4O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:33:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CeDk2-0001qo-5K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:33:30 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CeDk0-0001oe-45 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:33:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CeDjz-0001nq-Q6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:33:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [69.168.110.189] (helo=rattlesnake.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CeDYb-0000ZK-Do for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 09:21:41 -0500 Original-Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.115) Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:21:34 +0000 (UTC) Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-reply-to: (message from Dave Love on Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:29:13 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:31115 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:31115 Dave Love wrote, Of course, but I've no idea why that means you shouldn't use @{x,px,}ref. I'm pretty sure I confirmed with rms that external references should use the five-arg version of the @*ref commands when I was linking the extra manuals from the Emacs manual. Yes, that is how you are supposed to do it. After all, someone else, a user perhaps, may print a hard copy. (I assume @inforef was intended for stuff that wasn't produced from Texinfo source.) That was a major purpose in the 1980s, when Texinfo was just being invented. At that time, most Info files were written directly, rather than be produced as one of the surface expressions of a Texinfo deep representation. Nowadays, some people try to second guess those who read their work. They refer to what is supposed to be readily available via an @inforef, forgetting that a reader might have a printed surface expression at hand and prefer that. Or that someone might want to print and hand out a copy to tell others about Emacs .... The Emacs FAQ is especially egregious. Also, as Eli Zaretskii says @inforef exists for those situations where you, for some reason, want to point to the Info manual .... ... it's possible that only an Info version contains some text ... that was in @ifinfo..@end ifinfo .... As far as I can see, nowadays, @inforef should be devalued and people encouraged to use @{x,px,}ref. The Texinfo manual should be clarified to explain its historical origins, its occasional contemporary use, and why it does not fit a `single deep representation/multiple surface expressions' format. -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc