15 Sep
2019
15 Sep
'19
1:46 p.m.
Hi.
"U'll Be King of the Stars" <ullbeking(a)andrewnesbit.org> wrote:
It is actively maintained and developed.
Thanks for that pointer. I'll have to take a look at it.
Arnold
AS for authoring DocBook I was depending on GNU Emacs
to do a lot of the
heavy XML stuff for me. Wishful thinking perhaps.
Possibly. I use gvim. :-) And, no, I won't start _that_ discussion.
To each his own, live and let live.
I have written
books in troff, DocBook
and Texinfo. Texinfo is *by far* the superior markup language.
I've had a feeling that Texinfo has been getting brushed to the side. Are you suggesting that Info is a good as a rendered
documentation
format? Or just that Texinfo is good for proto-documents that are to be
authored in a parseable and meaningful format?
The latter.
Moreover it was (is?) very difficult to generate good
contents and index
pages with the official tools that I used at the time.
For _printed_ matter, the current texinfo does fine at table of
contents. The upcoming version of texinfo (in prerelease now) has
new indexing capabilities that bring it on par with what you see
in commercial publishing: multilevel indexing, as well as "see" and
"see also" entries.
I agree that Info isn't lovely; I prefer to read the generated HTML
from makeinfo, or the PDF from texi2pdf.
I have read the Texinfo documentation and I agree that
it seemed like a
rich markup language.
Much of the growth in the markup language has been at my urging
over the years. :-)
*I haven't really looked at eqn beyond browsing
docs and I'm not sure
how much I should expect from it.*
eqn is the inspiration for math mode in TeX. That's very clear,
and Knuth was also aware of tbl.
My own wish
for the next genie in a lamp that I come across would be
for a texinfo --> troff translator.
Have you looked at Pandoc? I don't know if it will do this but it's
worth checking out.