Re: [groff] Macros in their own package ...

> There are been attempts (doclifter and -Thtml being two of the most ambitious) to make *roff output interchangeable with the rest of the world I have something planned. But it's so ruthlessly absurd nobody would take it seriously without proof. =) Hence why I'm not speaking up about it until it'

Re: [groff] Macros in their own package ...

> John Gardner wrote: > > Apropos of compatibility outside `groff`... > > Does anybody know of an exhaustive list of *roff implementations still in > common use? (Including legacy repositories of historical interest) > > The current Roff interpreters I'm aware of are: > > 1. *GNU Troff