Hi Ingo,
> > > @g@chem [--] [filespec ...] | groff -p ...
>
> > No, this is wrong. tbl(1) doesn't show it needs piping to troff,
> > and chem shouldn't show it needs piping to pic.
>
> Is there are real-world use case where you would not pipe chem(1)
> output to pic(1) or groff(1)? I'm not aware of any, and in that
Something else that understands input to pic, or understands chem's
output and wants to tweak it before pic sees it?
> Maybe simply reword the first paragraph similar to the following:
>
> chem produces chemical structure diagrams, in particular showing the
> bonds and rings common in organic chemistry. Its output is intended
> to be piped into pic(1).
Perhaps
chem produces chemical-structure diagrams, particularly the bonds
and rings common in organic chemistry. Its output is suitable for
pic(1).
--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy
