Re: SCWM's embedded docs/text proc benchmarks/perl's 10x faster than guile.

[Lyn A Headley <laheadle@cs.uchicago.edu>]

It is my opinion that info is the best widely-used documentation
*system* out there.  It sure beats the pants off html, that is, today.
The important thing is that info is a standard (by that I mean that it
has certain features that everyone expects, not that it is so widely
used that you might as well use it since everyone else and mom is
too); it was designed from the beginning to be a documentation
browser, and it does that very well.

>>>>> "Per" == Per Bothner <bothner@cygnus.com> writes:

    Per> info is a dying "standard".  If we stick with info, we are
    Per> relegating ourselves to obscurity.  There are important

not as long as the FSF sticks behind it.

    Per> features (that people these days *expect*) that info does not
    Per> handle.  There is nothing in info that cannot be expressed

please elaborate.

    Per> with html.  True, most browsers do not handle previous/next
    Per> references, but there are hooks in html for them.

[snip]

    Per> I have some sympathy for this, but that is basically a user
    Per> interface issue.  There is nothing preventing a more
    Per> easily-navigable uder interface for html, except differing
    Per> traditions.

I think this is the main point we disagree on.  Your attitude is that
html is as flexible a markup language as info, and could in principle
eventually support all the ease of browsing that today's info systems
have.  Apparently you are in favor of creating yet another set of
documentation conventions, and a new browser program, which will
provide html with that flexibility, or perhaps pitching in with the
development of an already-begun alternative.


My attitude is that we already have a flexible documentation browser!
why abandon it?

of course, I'm not suggesting we *only* distribute info.  After all,
there are translators out there.  But as long as I have access to
info, I'm happy.

    Per> I agree, but if releases include html files in the
    Per> distributions (just like they are currently supposed to
    Per> include info files), I think most people would be happy.

I certainly would not be!


-Lyn