> i.e. a program If you want to think of it that way (as a way to be dismissive), sure. But I don't know anyone who when asking if some program foo has a manu

> i.e. a program If you want to think of it that way (as a way to be dismissive), sure. But I don't know anyone who when asking if some program foo has a manual would accept foo.git as an acceptable answer wrt the spirit of the question. There's also the not so small matter of packaging/distribution. It's the entire point of the linked post. Stuff like PDF or ebook formats are well understood to be self-contained, which is what makes them something that you can trivially hand-off to someone else with about the same ease as a real book (e.g. attaching it to an email). Software deployments tend to work differently. That should change. > Writing an unambiguous specification is hard work regardless of whether you do it in C or in English or something else Right. And programmers already have to contend with this. But when I float this idea around, people like to point this out, as if it's not merely hard, but impracticably hard—to the point of the suggestion being ludicrous. And yet (to repeat myself but not to belabor the point), it's not as if they get to escape this by following current practices; that's something that programmers _already_ have to contend with.