Re: [OFFTOPIC] Info files vs Man pages

[Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>]

> I don't think it would be difficult to get RMS and the rest of the
> GNU world to accept html as a replacement for info [note I am
> talking about replacing info, not texinfo], *if* if following exist:
> 
> * A program, written in C, that can translate texinfo to html,
> providing most of the options and functionality of the existing makeinfo.
> (texi2html is written in perl, and is therefore unsuitable for this
> kind of core software.)  (I have heard rumors about people extending
> makeinfo to do this, but I don't know how this is progressing.)

That's doable.

> * A stand-alone html browser that has all or most of the
> functionality of the standalone info browser (such
> as searching), and that has a similar look and feel (at
> least as an option).

Waste of time.  Extend Lynx if necessary (Lynx is under the GPL).
I can't think of anyone who prefers the standalone info browser
to Lynx that has used both.

Millions of people use HTML tools; hardly anyone uses info tools.
Given this, you don't bend the HTML tools to look like info tools;
rather you make the info data accessible to the HTML users.

> * An emacs mode that can be used for browsing html, and
> that has functionality and look and feel similar to the
> existing emacs info mode.  The existing W3 mode can probably
> be used as a starting-point.

The existing W3 mode should be sufficient (possibly with an extension).

The only extension that people have been asking for is the ability to
search across multiple files; it would be possible to come up a convention
to use META tags for this purpose (to mark the URL corresponding to
the next file).

> It is best if all of these are or can be GPL and copyright the FSF.

There's no need to rewrite Lynx just so the FSF can own it.  W3 meets
your conditions, as would an extended makeinfo.