On 1/22/24, Oliver Corff <oliver.co...@email.de> wrote: > yes, I did have a look at that section of the groff documentation, and I > must confess that I read the text as non-exhaustive, meaning the five > specific ligatures are built-in, with the option to increase the > repertoire of ligatures.
You're right, the wording there isn't as clear as it could be. The sentence "Some fonts may include 'ft' and 'ct' ligatures; they are archaic and GNU 'troff' does not (yet) support them" is misleading in its specificity. I submit that "Some fonts may include other ligatures; GNU 'troff' does not (yet) support them" is both terser and clearer. It could even add a clause about how certain languages (such as Tibetan) rely on these ligatures not just for typographic aesthetics, as with the English-language ones, but to render the language correctly. I'm not sure that communicates any additional information to the reader, but I know zilch about Tibetan, so you might better be able to suggest a wording that makes the situation clear.
