Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

> > Got a “this debug view expired” response. Ugh. Try https://codepen.io/alhadis/full/WNwWrOP instead; I was trying to omit that stupid toolbar at the top… > I don’t suppose that’s a straight conversion… Nope, not at all. It's a hand-written portrayal of what I consider to be a "perfect" re

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 12:14:47AM -0400, Larry Kollar wrote: > Subject: Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint? > > I’m not going to pronounce Docbook dead, but open-source > projects that use it (or Texinfo) have accidentally erected a > barrier to entry for people who want to contribute to the >

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

On Sun, Sep 27, 2020, James K. Lowden wrote: > I think the idea behind grothml is that one input document "just works" > with any backend. A different -- and, I would argue, more > realistic -- approach would be a macro-to-HTML converter that worked > only for documents expressly written with HTML

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

John Gardner wrote: > Ironically, modern HTML isn't too dissimilar to nroff(1) output. True. Upon seeing HTML for the first time (around 1986 if IIRC) I was struck by the similarities between it and the -mm macros. > … instead of trying to preserve fonts, colours, margins and columns when > g

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

James K. Lowden wrote: >> Complain about Markdown all you will, and use weird-arse corner cases >> to show it?s Bad, but GFM can handle a lot of everyday text. > > If you limit the feature set to what markdown does, -ms macros are > readable too. It's a little tricky to set up an auto-increme

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

Ironically, modern HTML isn't too dissimilar to nroff(1) output. For a start, document structure and content hierarchy is critical for readability, be it for humans (TTY output) or browsers (web-pages). Secondly, most presentational details are lost because they're irrelevant to the target medium.

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 00:14:47 -0400 Larry Kollar wrote: > Complain about Markdown all you will, and use weird-arse corner cases > to show it?s Bad, but GFM can handle a lot of everyday text. If you limit the feature set to what markdown does, -ms macros are readable too. It's a little tricky to

Re: Groff bug: echo foo | groff -Pbar

Does it make a difference if you add a prologue file named `bar`? From grops(1): *-P**prologue-file* Use the file *prologue-file* (in the font path) as the prologue instead of the default prologue file *prologue*. The error I get with groff 1.22.4 is different: $ echo foo | groff -Pbar grops:

Groff bug: echo foo | groff -Pbar

Using groff 1.22.4, groff complains and then dumps core when I do this: $ echo foo | groff -Pbar troff: fatal error: error writing output file groff: troff: Signal 11 (core dumped) Is it just me or does that happen for everyone? —b9

Re: [groff] 01/08: mdoc: Accept mixed-case section headings.

At 2020-09-19T16:01:22-0500, Dave Kemper wrote: > Straying away from man-page considerations and comparing these two > approaches in general: > > The .string* requests also have the advantage of handling alphabetic > Latin-1 characters and the roff escapes that represent them (though > .stringup f

Re: Let's Play: Use the Source, Luke! (was: .ie as target of .if)

I'm assuming the logic you've described applies to `.while` requests too? (IIRC, this is the only other conditional that shares the semantics of `.ie` and `.if`). The next conditional handles input in...non-copy mode, a thing that no > *roff documentation I have ever seen has a name for. (This ir

Let's Play: Use the Source, Luke! (was: .ie as target of .if)

Hi, Dave! At 2020-09-17T12:03:31-0500, Dave Kemper wrote: > Consider the much simpler example: > > .if 0 .if 1 \{\ > .tm foo > .\} > .tm bar > > Following your explanation, the interpreter would evaluate ".if 0", > decide it was false, and ignore the rest of the line, thus missing > that the lin

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

>> This is similar in spirit to what Werner Lemberg started with >> devtag.tmac, [...] It was rather Gaius Mulley who started work on that. Werner

Re: (off topic?) Docbook? Re: manlint?

> > I dimly perceive a lot of good infrastructure there that could be put to > some excellent use. We just need a contributor to pick up the mission. This has been on my to-do list for Roff.js for quite some time (ETA hopefully this *decade*). Once/if I finis