Interesting side discusiion, but one question that's been raised in my
mind is: why has groff decided to NOT add "modern" font handling?
Would it simply be too hard to do or is there some other reason to
stick to "traditional" font support?
After joining this board (and being mostly a lurker), I've been clued
in to the awesome -mom macro package. I'd like to use it with my
extensive collection of OTF fonts, but it seems like groff's font
support rather lags behind that of Heirloom troff... Are there any
plans to add "modern" font hand
> And if you are looking for other examples, several international
> standards, including both the C and POSIX standards, are good examples
> of large, popular, *roff based publications (and always have been).
>
> The current version of POSIX (due to be published next year) is almost
> 4,000 pages
...that groff/troff seems to be written off by so many as "obsolete"
and "only useful for man pages", despite the fact that it can do
everything that TeX/LaTeX (seemingly the favored non-WYSIWYG document
processor) can do but while taking up 3 megabytes (as opposed to the
300 or so used by the aver
