Re: On being web-friendly and why info must die

[Phillip Lord]

Achim Gratz <address@hidden> writes:

> Richard Stallman writes:
>>   > Yes, but turning the tables: what exactly are the requirements for a GNU
>>   > documentation format?
>>
>> It has to have all the features offered by Texinfo, except that if you
>> can show a certain Texinfo feature is hardly ever used by GNU manuals,
>> maybe it can be omitted.
>
> So in essence you're saying that the requirement is semantic markup, but
> you don't care about the syntax.  This actually rules out quite a few of
> the contenders discussed in this thread.  Indeed by its very ature
> semantic markup is intrusive as it often re-states something that is
> obvious from context to the reader, for the sole purpose of making that
> context explicit to some processing step later on.  In that case, our
> efforts might be better spent in developing ways to recognize such
> context and injecting the semantic markup automatically.

That makes sense. An org-mode based solution would be able to
distinguish (and check) function names, so could add this semantics
easily; a fall-back macro would probably still be needed for those cases
where a function and variable name clash.