On 2/25/2016 9:12 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 2/24/2016 10:05 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> On 2/24/2016 8:41 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> That brings to mind why chm ... it's been obsolete for sometime now and
>>> only exists as legacy now. At any rate I got tired of being the only
>>> person doing /any/ of the grunt work necessary to get this fixed. I
>>> don't use windows version so this just dropped off my radar. I getting
>>> plenty of mileage out of stand-alone unix version docs. When I want to
>>> find something quickly I just go 3.3.1.2 Keywords section.
>>
>> CHM is pretty great. Quick loading when compared to PHP. Can search all
>> help files or just within one page. Nested, alphabetical index with more
>> stuff than just key terms. A TOC that is always visible and within easy
>> reach, and automatically shows/highlights the page you are on.
>> Context-sensitive help, as clipka mentioned.
>
> You've misunderstood ... PHP is ONLY used to pull from wiki and format
> back into to the standalone html packages (win, nix and mac)
>
>>
>> I don't think anyone here is going to roll an alternative that is just
>> as good. Just because an OSS alternative is /possible/ doesn't mean
>> anyone will get around to actually making it.
>>
>>
>> Mike
>

I didn't mention PHP.


Mike

Post a reply to this message