Re: HTML-Info design

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Nic Ferrier <address@hidden>
> Cc: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
> address@hidden
> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:40:54 +0000
> 
> You are suggesting this isn't a valid POC.

No, I didn't say that.  Quite the contrary, I said it does constitute
a POC.

> * implements node browsing through a toc
> * auto completion of toc elements
> * auto completion of index elements (how they are displayed is really
>   irrelevant)
> * info like traversal (collecting the history)
> * an info/emacs like keymap
> 
> What it does not implement:
> 
> * full text search
> 
> But I don't see why that is a difficult thing.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.  If I knew JS like you do, like I know C
and Lisp and a few other languages, I could probably have an
independent opinion without a working implementation.  But I don't, so
I must look at the implementation, see what it does and what it
doesn't, and decide if I'm convinced.

Please understand that to me, the search functionality -- all kinds of
it -- that we have in Info is the main feature.  That is what makes
Info shine in my eyes.  Not menu completion (in a browser, I'm
supposed to be using the mouse, so I don't really need completion so
much).  Not the Emacs-like keymap (I can configure my browser for that
myself, and actually did that already).  Not Info-like history -- that
is trivial with a Web browser.  All that is much less important than
the features that let me find stuff quickly and efficiently.  So text
search across the entire document is a must, and likewise substring
matching in index entries and support for several index nodes.
Without this, a documentation browser is not worth it for me.

Now, it could well be that adding those is a piece of cake, but I just
don't know that.  Until you show me that it is indeed doable without
jumping through hoops, and can work on several popular browsers, I
won't be convinced, sorry.

Likewise with the directionality of the index prompt -- it might be a
minor issue for a POC, but if it turns out that it is insoluble in
principle, it's a showstopper, I hope you agree.

And there are other valuable features in Info, please take a look at
the commands in inf*.el files.  Some of them probably won't be
possible or practical with www+js technique, like index-apropos, for
example.  Which is a pity, at least for me, but what bothers me is how
many more of such important features will have to be thrown away, how
much useful functionality we will have to give up?

We are talking about replacing an existing browser, one that is
developed for decades and is chock-full of useful features.  I use
many of them every day.  People can say it's "samizdat" all they want,
but for me it is a tremendously useful tool.  If you want to convince
me that the replacement will be worthy, you need to show that those
important features, or at least some non-trivial subset thereof, can
be had with your suggested approach.  And given my JS ignorance, the
only way of showing that is by implementing it.  Because I have no
idea what will it take to write a multi-file regexp search in JS.

I hope I made myself clear.

Once again, thanks for working on this.