Re: [Groff] ESR in manpages versus the WEB

Larry Kollar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > But even if you aren't interested in generating (or converting to) > HTML, whether markup is structured or presentational basically > depends on what you call it. :-) For example, emphasis and > citations might both be rendered as italic, but that doesn't mean >

Re: [Groff] ESR in manpages versus the WEB

Gunnar Ritter wrote: D.E. Evans asked about an improved grohtml, or even a replacement. Perhaps grohtml can be improved. grohtml is broken by concept. It is thus impossible that it will ever reach a satisfying state. This is a little off the subject, but I disagree. I'm already using grohtm

Re: [Groff] New PS font definition files

> > I've finally updated the 35 Adobe core fonts in devps. Please > > test. > > you did not use afmtodit option to include comments, reflecting > font version etc. Done now, thanks. > If afms for groff fonts (and symbol.afm) are in devps dir, > symbolsl.afm must also be there. It's there, in t

Re: [Groff] doclifter on groffer.man

> You have to solve your own problems instead of killing other good > projects. > > [...] > > When the slime is replaced back to reason more will come. Bernd, please soften your tone. It's not helpful. Eric has valid concerns. Remember that you do funny hops in groffer to cater for a bunch o

Re: [Groff] doclifter on groffer.man

[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You have to solve your own problems instead of killing other good projects. Right, which is why the groff pages need to be fixed so as not to kill XMan, TkMan, Rosetta, and all other third-party viewers. My doclifter is not even really the issue here, it's

Re: [Groff] New PS font definition files

Dear Werner, On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Werner LEMBERG wrote: I've finally updated the 35 Adobe core fonts in devps. Please test. you did not use afmtodit option to include comments, reflecting font version etc. If afms for groff fonts (and symbol.afm) are in devps dir, symbolsl.afm must also be

Re: [Groff] doclifter on groffer.man

> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > There has never been any IETF RFP, nor ANSI/ISO/W3C committee work. > Thus, there is no de jure standard here, only a de facto one. It is the GNU standard, so it is the standard in the world of free software. We spit on all commercial standards. We use them to extend t

[Groff] New PS font definition files

I've finally updated the 35 Adobe core fonts in devps. Please test. Werner ___ Groff mailing list Groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff

Re: [Groff] Simplifying groff documentation

Gunnar Ritter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Probably. But is likely that man will at some point start presenting > > through the browser by default if you have a BROWSER variable defined. > > For those who do not like that, I will definitively keep > the Heirloom Toolchest "man" command to prefer nrof

Re: [Groff] doclifter on groffer.man

[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > That's not the fault of groff, but you are not willing to accept the > standard. There has never been any IETF RFP, nor ANSI/ISO/W3C committee work. Thus, there is no de jure standard here, only a de facto one. In any case, I already said I would be willi

Re: [Groff] Simplifying groff documentation

"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ralph Corderoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Will /usr/share/man still have roff man pages as well as the HTML > > conversion? > > Probably. But is likely that man will at some point start presenting > through the browser by default if you have a BROWSER

Re: [Groff] Simplifying groff documentation

Ralph Corderoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Will /usr/share/man still have roff man pages as well as the HTML > conversion? Probably. But is likely that man will at some point start presenting through the browser by default if you have a BROWSER variable defined. -- http://www.catb.org

Re: [Groff] doclifter on groffer.man

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It's not a bug, it's part of the standard. `grohtml' is able to transform > all > man pages indluding your enemies to a beautiful html output. So this > should also be possible for XML. > > How about integrating `doclifter' into `groff' as generater for `docbook' > o

Re: [Groff] doclifter on groffer.man

> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Bernd Warken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > `doclifter' should be fixed to handle this correctly. I cannot > > detect any necessity for a "safe" list. I will not fall back to the > > old scheme of 2 letter variable names. > > I opened this discussion because, for just eigh

Re: [Groff] Simplifying groff documentation

Hi Eric, > My vision is that all the legacy help browsers become ways to point > your browser at subtrees of the HTML on your system. /usr/share/man > and /usr/share/info would be the most important HTML subtrees, but > there could be others, including project-specific others. A bit off-topic..