Re: [h-e-w] Merging Win32 documentation with Emacs main docs

[David Vanderschel]

"Eli Zaretskii" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >In other words, if Emacs can easily resolve a reference to an Info
>> >manual from within another Info manual, it can also resolve such a
>> >reference from an HTML page.

>> Eli, could you please provide a pointer to some
>> documentation of what such a "properly formatted
>> reference to an Info manual" looks like in an HTML
>> document?

>I don't have time to do the research, sorry.  But since something like
>"(emacs)Top" is enough to get "M-x ffap" do the Right Thing, I find it
>hard to believe that what I said cannot be done with some customization.

As far as I am concerned, you have lost your
credibility about what you claimed.  Not only do not
know how to do it, you do not even have pointer to a
document that might tell us how it do it.  You based
an argument on a 'fact', for which it now appears that
your only basis is your unsupported belief.  Now you
also admit that "some customization" may be required.

Recall that this can start from newbies browsing the
Emacs Wiki.  Whatever happens must happen naturally
without them having to jump through hoops and without
requiring them to use emacs as their browser.  I
intended this to be a discussion about what can be
achieved readily in practice, not about what is
theoretically possible.

>> Given that the mechanism you mention would only work
>> if one were using emacs as his browser, the argument,
>> as I understand it, still strikes me as being somewhat
>> irrelevant.  I personally would rather use a
>> full-function browser like Firefox

>Here's where we differ: I find no reason whatsoever to educate users
>to go to another browser, where Emacs already supports the same
>functionality.

"another browser"?  I suspect that there are very few
people for whom emacs w3 is their first browser.  Use
of emacs instead of one of the biggies (like Firefox)
for browsing would be more along the lines of what I
would refer to as using "another browser" and the
transition to it is more like what would require an
effort "to educate users to go to another browser".
With this opinion of yours, I think you are in a small
minority.  I am also a fan of emacs, but I don't look
to it to solve ALL my computing needs.  Some browser
function may be available in emacs; but, for me, emacs
is aesthetically unsatisfactory compared to a
full-function browser and it lacks a lot of fancy
features (extensions included) which I have come to
value in Firefox.  There are very few Web sites on
which I would consider using emacs.  (The Wiki might
be one if it really were possible to make the
connection to the Info files and if such references
were in there.)

Regards,
  David V.