Eric Abrahamsen <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> writes: > Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes: > >> Eric Abrahamsen <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> writes: >> >>> Oh I don't think it's about shortcomings, just about having a version >>> that's tweaked specifically for writing Emacs manuals. I _really_ want >>> my packages to have info manuals, and I _really_ don't want to learn how >>> to write texinfo. I saw Rasmus' Org manual in org, and it looked like a >>> lot of work. Then I noticed that the Magit manuals used this >>> texinfo-plus thing, and it seemed good enough. >> >> I think "ox-texinfo" is (almost) able to write Emacs manuals. >> >> IMO, you are comparing oranges and apples. Org's manual is historically >> written as a (very convoluted) pure Texinfo document, with many macros >> and different authors. Trying to convert it to Org for an Org to Texinfo >> process is bound to be painful. OTOH, Magit's manual is probably more >> straightforward, i.e., written as an Org document from the beginning, >> with simpler requirements. >> >> In both cases, you cannot eschew learning a bit of Texinfo, if only for >> the various indices commands and the installation part in the Info >> directory. > > Well, I'll admit laziness has been my major motivation throughout the > whole process. > >>> I think what might be nice would be to have another exporter, derived >>> from ox-texinfo, specifically for writing Emacs manuals, that helps >>> authors conform to the Emacs manual conventions. The way texinfo-plus >>> handles lists of keybindings/user options/etc is nice, and it appears to >>> set up the indexes for you, you only have to add concept index entries >>> manually. >> >> AFAIU, the way texinfo-plus handles lists of ... is certainly nice, but >> it's unrelated to Emacs manual conventions. It helps authors conform >> Magit's author conventions. Those are fine, but I'm pretty sure not all >> Emacs manuals follow them (Org doesn't, obviously). > > The main thing I was after was semi-automated indexing (obviously some > of it you have to do yourself). I just looked more closely at the texi > output that texinfo-plus produced, and it seems to only be doing concept > and key indexing, not function or variable indexing. So that's not as > helpful as I thought.
And regarding the lists of commands and keys, what would be the recommended way of making a list of @deffns and corresponding index entries? Perhaps it would be enough to expand the example document in the texinfo section of the Org manual. Eric
