Joe Brenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm agreed that "info" is very useful, particularly when you
> use it from inside of emacs. I was wondering what trouble
> people really have with it?
Oh, I can tell you those things too. (Can you tell I've experienced
this argument before?)
The usual complaints are:
* It's got a crappy interface: The standalone program definately
does, and alternative viewers are not always apparent to the people
complaining about info. Maybe they wouldn't complain with a better
interface.
* It's too hard to find stuff in it. Usually, those complaining are
looking for command-line flags, which are fairly buried in most info
documents. Those complaining are also usually unaware of info
features such as the easy-to-access index and the ability to search
the whole document by regexp.
* It's another format, and I don't want to have to look in two
places. A fairly legit argument, but man is just unsuited to large
documentation sets. Personally, I'd rather have an info file than
Perl's 80 independant man pages, since info makes it easier to
navigate and search that volume of documentation.
* It's unstandard, we should have HTML. Sure, but as I posted, right
now the infrastructure around HTML makes it more difficult to use,
although you'll get a nice happy browser to click around in.
So, really, if there had been a better non-Emacs interface, I think
Info wouldn't have such a bad rap.
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
81 days, 22 hours, 8 minutes, 26 seconds till we run away.
IBM: Insolent Bickering Mal-der-mer
_______________________________________________
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
