Hi Peter, On Tue, Dec 04 2018 at 03:16:50 PM, Peter Schaffter <pe...@schaffter.ca> wrote: > Thanks for replying so thoroughly, and so passionately, to my query > about the mom manpage. [...]
I won't discuss (at least today) what is the best place to document mom (manpage or html doc), but as a regular mom user I always refer to the mom html doc and never to the manpage. Not because I dislike manpages (every day I look to plenty of manpages), but because I am confident that the html documentation is up-to-date and that I will find what I am looking for. As the html doc is de facto the current reference doc for mom (again, I'm not arguing whether it's good or bad), I think the paragraph "4.6 mom" in groff documentation should be modified. It just says: "See the groff mom(7) man page (type man groff_mom at the command line), which gives a short overview and a link to its extensive documentation in HTML format.". It would be better if it gave the entry points on the mom site and on the generated html doc, only mentioning the manpage as second source of information. When I started to use groff (6 years ago I think) and was looking for a macro package to write general documents, I first picked ms because it was quite well described in groff texinfo documentation. Nothing wrong with ms but later on I switched to mom, mainly because it was extensively documented and actively maintained. I can't remember exactly how I found the link of the online site but I was a bit puzzled that it wasn't mentioned in the texinfo doc. Could you please fix this paragraph in groff documentation? This could be included in 1.22.4. I think the online html doc could also be mentioned in https://www.gnu.org/software/groff/; in the "Mission Statement" paragraph, a .mom document is given as an example without a single word on what the mom package is. Regards, Bertrand
