> The mom macros came into being primarily to serve the needs > of typesetters and non-technical writers. I realized that > would be annoying to technical writers who liked mom but > needed greater functionality (floats and keeps, > cross-referencing, nested footnotes, etc.), but no more > annoying than, say, learning ms/mm/me only to discover that > they don't natively--or easily--provide the design flexbility > of mom. Macro sets, it seems, are like any other > app: the one you like inevitably doesn't have the thing you want. :)
Since I don't know much about groff yet, this may be a uninformed question - but is it possible to use e.g. other listmembers' specific macros for crossreferences together with mom? I browsed the archives and found out that e.g. Jon Snader has some xref macros. > Which brings me to a question: is anyone on the list > interested in working with me on expanding mom? So far, it's > been a one-man-band project, but I don't have the luxury of > developing that way any more. Being a typographer and former printer, I'd be interested to come with suggestions regarding typographic constructs, solutions and extensions in and to mom. I have a long "typographer's wishlist" where I've written down things & ideas emanating from the annoyance of working with QuarkXPress, InDesign and Framemaker. Can't help you with the actual writing of the macros, though! :( Btw, I think I read somewhere that groff never ever hyphenates the last word on a page. Is that true? I guess that makes the guys over at comp.text.tex envious. There are quite a few threads about how to make TeX & Children succeed with that...! Best regards, Mats Broberg _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
