At 2023-04-11T14:37:51+0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > I see groff's documentation has Roman numerals but roman fonts.
Yes, that's a long-standing practice I haven't yet seen fit to deviate from. ;-) 3af475486f doc/groff.texinfo (Werner LEMBERG 2001-03-23 23:07:51 +0000 454) @c Note: We say `Roman numerals' but `roman font'. > > Fonts > > eqn uses up to three typefaces to set an equation: an italic > > face for letters, a roman face for everything else, and a bold > > face. > > If the Roman face is for everything else then it seems odd at this > point that bold is needed. I had similar thoughts, which is why I had the sentence about bold being usable to mark matrices and vectors, which Doug found condescending. Possibly, migrating your actively voiced suggestion from later in the mail here and recasting a little will solve both problems. [namely] > > The bold font is used by the bold primitive. > > The bold primitive uses the bold font. > It's only at the end that everything else is probably seen to be > ‘digits’. > > eqn uses three typefaces to set an equation: italic, Roman, and bold. > Set them to a groff font style with primitives gifont, grfont, and gbfont. > The defaults are I, R, and B in the current font family. > The chartype primitive sets a character's type, see above. > A letter character is set in italics. > A digit character in Roman. > The bold font is used by the bold primitive. I'll marinate on this for a bit. Thanks! Just about anything one does with "old" groff documentation tugs on a loose thread. If I were a frequent Emacs user, I'd exhaust the stack with all the recursive edits I undertook. Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
