backward compatibility and more

Hi,

7 things to say !

1) I would like to make a change to the texi2html interface that will introduce
some backward incompatibility. I am fairly certain that this has to be done,
the issue is how. The problem is with @-commands in the style_map which have
more than one argument (@email, @uref). Currently the arguments are split in
the formatting function. I believe this is bad because this is a texinfo
related processing which should be done in the main program, and also
because once @comma{} which evaluates to a `,' is introduced it will be
necessary, and also because the arguments might need to be processed 
differently.

Currently the formatting function is called like that:

function ($text, $command)

To be backward compatible it could be possible to call the function like that:

function ($arg1, $arg2, ..., $command)

But this is not satisfying, because whenever a new argument is introduced
(this will be the case for @acronym soon, for example) the prototype has
to be changed.

The protoype could also be

function (\@args, $command)

This would be much more usable but not backward compatible. Still I prefer
that form. If you agree, it could be possible to have a variable or even
a command line switch reverting to the old behaviour. Would it be worth it ?

2) I think that it would be better if functions reference were used in the
%style_map hash instead of strings like '&func1. No issue of backward
compatibility here. Right ?

3) texi2html now verifies that an accented letter is in an unicode map and
otherwise warns the user. On the texinfo mailing list this feature wasn't
considered good. Should I remove it ?

4) with texi2dvi and makeinfo nested style constructs are not handled, only
the inner one. This could change, but not soon. I believe this is bad, but
maybe we could have a variable enabling that "feature". Do you think it is
an interesting feature ?

5) If somebody wants to make a texi2html logo it would be nice. It should
be something tiny with a transparent background, the idea being to do the
same than with the singular manual, and use it as a top button.

6) Should we maintain the man page and if so, should I add all the options
to the man page even the most esoteric ones ?

7) For those who don't read the ChangeLogs here is a nice new (in my opinion),
I added an init file which converts texinfo to roff. The output is based
on the texi2roff output. The primary aim wasn't to have an up to date
texi to roff converter, that's only a nice side effect. But I wanted to make a
converter to another format in order to be sure that every piece of the
formatting could be customized.

Pat