"G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Kurt! > One of the resources I've used while updating Larry > Kollar's ms.ms document as discussed earlier on this list is the > archives of the Unix Heritage Society (TUHS). They have many historical > Unix implementations, often including macro package sources. Two > valuable documents are the V6 and V7 Unix ms implementations. > > https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V6/usr/lib/tmac.s > https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/lib/tmac/tmac.s > > DWB (Documenter's Work Bench) 3.3, which I _think_ is the > open-sourced-and-thrown-over-the-wall baseline from which Gunnar Ritter > started developing Heirloom Doctools, is also a useful reference. > > https://github.com/n-t-roff/DWB3.3/blob/master/macros/ms/tmac.s.sr
Thanks for pointing these resources out; they'll be very useful. > The 11/12ths FL ratio is common to all of these. > > Given the tenor of recent discussion, I'm wondering if we should just go > ahead and change groff's default FL to 11/12. And would a groff user notice *that* change? I'm conflicted. It does seem that history is on the side of 11/12. I'd guess that this is something else that wasn't documented, and may have been guessed at when it came time to the groff -ms reimplementation. > And maybe also make its MINGW an alias of GW; as I noted in October, > with the above resources available (which the community didn't have in > 1990 or 2000), I think we can argue that the MINGW groffism arose from > incomplete documentary record. I thinking making MINGW an alias of GW is a very good idea. -- T. Kurt Bond, tkurtb...@gmail.com, https://tkurtbond.github.io/
