Re: Add support for generating HTML docs a` la PDF, etc.

[Alexandre Duret-Lutz]

>>> "Richard" == Richard Dawe <address@hidden> writes:

 Richard> Hello.

 Richard> Below is a patch that adds HTML documentation
 Richard> generation in a similar way to PDF, PostScript, etc. -
 Richard> by adding 'html' targets for texinfo sources from
 Richard> info_TEXINFOS.

The problem, with html, is that nobody agree about what the
ouput should be.  I'd say that if we support html, we should
use the default makeinfo output (which is to split on nodes),
and let the user say `AM_MAKEINFOFLAGS = --no-split' when wanted.
This is what we do for info files already.  

Still some people prefer using texi2dvi, and some also want to
distribute html files.  It seems hard to satisfy these.

 Richard> I know this is different to the way proposed in
 Richard> TODO. I read TODO afterwards. ;)

Let's ignore TODO.  I don't think we need html_TEXINFOS.  Not until
the GNU Coding Standards introduce a $(htmldir) variable.

Right now we only install info files in $(infodir).  Other
ps/pdf(/html) targets are there only for convenience.

 Richard> For consistency, if an html_TEXINFOS thing (primary?)
 Richard> is added, it seems that there should be pdf_TEXINFOS,
 Richard> etc. too.

eww...

 Richard> This patch also does not update the example given
 Richard> about html_DATA in the automake.texi manual.  So this
 Richard> patch isn't complete - it's more a conversation
 Richard> starter. ;)

For a starter the patch looks very great to me!  I think it is
worth a NEWS entry.   Also the test case should better make sure
files are cleaned up properly (I'd do this with `$MAKE distcheck'),
with or without --no-split (if we are going to support this).
-- 
Alexandre Duret-Lutz