On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Chad Albers <calb...@neomantic.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Christopher Allan Webber > <cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: >> Ludovic Courtès writes: >> >>> Christopher Allan Webber <cweb...@dustycloud.org> skribis: >>> >>>> Chad Albers writes: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>> b. More robust documentation system - texinfo is not the greatest. And >>>>> it's non-trivial to generate any documentation (including texinfo) for >>>>> modules. >>>> >>>> Texinfo is pretty nice to use if you're an emacs user... in fact, if >>>> you're an emacs user, it's the best documentation reading system in the >>>> world. But not everyone's an emacs user. >>> >>> I think Texinfo is OK even if you’re not an Emacs user, no? Especially >>> with the just-release 6.1 where menus can (finally!) be automatically >>> generated. >>> >>>> If the html export was nicely themed > > IMHO, HTML has clearly won the documentation game. I believe it goes > without saying that most developers have a web browser installed, > rather than a textinfo reader. The more the guile project publishes > easily searchable (without google) documentation in the most > accessible media format the better for guile.
We can clearly have both. Nice looking HTML docs on the Guile website are possible with a little CSS magic and some nice fonts. Thanks to Texinfo, we also get Info and PDF versions! Having the Guile documentation nicely integrated with my editor (Emacs) is a *huge* productivity booster. Having HTML-only documentation would be a major setback for Guile. - Dave
