() Patrice Dumas pertu...@gnu.org
() Thu, 29 Nov 2012 20:33:29 +0100
I think that additional information that wouldn't be in the
XML would deserve a distinct section in the IXIN file.
Yes. Towards that end, IXIN 1.2 specifies the ‘meta’ section now:
() Patrice Dumas pertu...@gnu.org
() Wed, 15 Aug 2012 00:04:47 +0200
We mustn't forget the all-important ‘@paragraphindent’ [froth
froth] !!! I have been waiting a long time for that to be
runtime-tweakable...
That is to be found in the tree, as it affects all the Texinfo coming
Would you like to work with a few others to design a format that
extends Texinfo SXML and would be adequate for the job of fast
display of manuals in Emacs?
Sure, but isn't that what we're already in the process of doing? :-D
If people have already started doing this,
Hi!
Thien-Thi Nguyen t...@gnuvola.org skribis:
It would be cool if Texinfo were able to produce SXML, a format directly
translatable to/from XML, directly.
Honestly, with Guile 2, translating from XML to SXML boils down to
calling ‘xml-sxml’, which is easy enough.
If the XML backend didn’t
() l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
() Mon, 13 Aug 2012 14:48:17 +0200
It would be cool if Texinfo were able to produce SXML, a format
directly translatable to/from XML, directly.
Honestly, with Guile 2, translating from XML to SXML boils down to
calling ‘xml-sxml’, which is easy
Would you like to work with a few others to design a format
that extends Texinfo SXML and would be adequate for the job of fast
display of manuals in Emacs?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's
() Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org
() Tue, 14 Aug 2012 14:16:43 -0400
Would you like to work with a few others to design a format that
extends Texinfo SXML and would be adequate for the job of fast
display of manuals in Emacs?
Sure, but isn't that what we're already in the process of
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 00:33 +0200, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
() Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org
() Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:51:20 -0400
Perhaps people resist XML, no matter its viability, because it is ugly.
Karl's talking about using it as an output format, not to write by hand.
Yes,
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:35:14PM +0200, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
between the source and target vertices. A better explanation is at:
(info (elisp) Circular Objects)
Ok.
That said, we want to be nice to programs that have only basic ‘read’
capabilities, and should plan to support
() k...@freefriends.org (Karl Berry)
() Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:37:10 GMT
These days, as I keep repeating to no apparent effect another viable
-- as far as I can see, the best -- approach is use the Texinfo XML
output as your input.
Perhaps people resist XML, no matter its viability,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:37:10AM +, Karl Berry wrote:
What about just Texinfo, or Texinfo-as-sexps?
If it works, why not? Stefan, would this work?
These days, as I keep repeating to no apparent effect, another viable --
as far as I can see, the best -- approach is use the
I am not Stefan, but in my view, this would be a horrible step
backward.
I don't know about back/forward, but the reason I think it wouldn't be
right is because it would force the Elisp renderer to build the indices
and things like that.
The representation we need should have all such global
These days, as I keep repeating to no apparent effect another viable
-- as far as I can see, the best -- approach is use the Texinfo XML
output as your input.
Perhaps people resist XML, no matter its viability, because it is ugly.
Karl's talking about using it as an
rms, years ago, you wrote something like this (it's been in the Texinfo
manual for ages):
If you are a programmer and would like to contribute to the GNU
project by implementing additional output formats for Texinfo, that
would be excellent. But please do not write a
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:51:51PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
We're talking about having Emacs read Texinfo format, not converting
it to some other format.
But that's the part that is hard to do the same way in every parsers.
The conversion is not problematic, it may be different for
() Richard Stallman r...@gnu.org
() Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:51:20 -0400
Perhaps people resist XML, no matter its viability, because it is ugly.
Karl's talking about using it as an output format, not to write by hand.
Yes, i understand. Anyway, one program(mer)'s output is another's
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:33:58AM +0200, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
I think so.
However, as mentioned in another post, whatever format we choose should
support indexing and incremental loading (similar to the way Emacs keeps
track of and displays docstrings). With that in mind, i realize
Would you like to help design a specific format, based on HTML,
that we could use to implement the Info features that browsers
don't have?
What about just Texinfo, or Texinfo-as-sexps?
If it works, why not? Stefan, would this work?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free
What about just Texinfo, or Texinfo-as-sexps?
If it works, why not? Stefan, would this work?
(I don't believe either Stefan nor Chong is on this list, so I cc them.
Stefan, Chong, this is a continuation of the gnu-prog-discuss thread.)
I am not Stefan, but in my view, this would be
19 matches
Mail list logo
