Hi John, At 2023-02-07T06:26:22+1100, John Gardner wrote: > Then how about a callback? It could be called with the relevant > parameters, and authors can use plain ol' Roff to specify the > hyperlink format.
That creates more places for something to go wrong. Also I don't want people to get the idea that they should be defining this callback _in the man page document_. That is very much the wrong way to go. > I think we're on two different pages here. That last list of URL > formats was intended to illustrate the potential for variation amidst > software authors. It's very easy for somebody to "invent" their own > man page URL scheme, one that may be partially- or wholly-incompatible > with other, better-established schemes. Yes, but you have actually encountered these in practical experience. > Ultimately, only Terminal.app's scheme (x-man-page://) should be taken > seriously by Groff. I would prefer to hold macOS up to ridicule in this respect in hopes of motivating its users (and developers) to standardize on something.[1] What I'm calling "format 1" would be best, but I know that NIH syndrome dominates a lot of corporate software development. And some elsewhere. If I had to use macOS for some reason, I'd go out of my way to use xterm rather than Terminal.app. Lack of man page hyperlinks is not a deal- breaker for me personally. I have not begun a campaign to talk Thomas Dickey into supporting OSC 8 in xterm. I do not expect it to be easy. > > apropos(1) is not in groff's department. > > Right, sorry. I keep getting my wires crossed when discussing man(1) > and Groff at once… No worries. I think a lot of people are fuzzy about the distinction, so opportunities like this to set the record straight are to be seized. :) Regards, Branden [1] You can see that I'd be brilliant in corporate communications.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
