Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

JM Marcastel wrote: > I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an alternate > format for UNIX man-pages. > (Cf. https://github.com/marcastel/marcastel/discussions/7) > > Rather than re-inventing the wheel I would ideally like this to become part > of an existing tool

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

Hello alls, De : James K. Lowden > The problem is, the solution to a better tool lies not in the etheral > domain of language design, but in the grotty domain of GUI > programming. I would also agree that pointing clearly the problem of unix manpages would help find the correct solution. - if m

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 02:57:25 +0200 JM Marcastel wrote: I think you're confusing two things: the capability of mdoc and groff, and the user's experience. Don't worry; you're not the first! > If all that can be done in mdoc, then fine, I am willing to give a > try? even if a little frustrated by

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> On 22 Apr 2021, at 09:35, Marc Chantreux wrote: > > *But* if there is a tool that just read a code written in (name your preferred > langage) and write the mandoc output (eventually use comments for the > other parts), i really would give this tool a try. Perhaps Markdown is not the approp

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> On 22 Apr 2021, at 18:37, JM Marcastel wrote: > >> On 22 Apr 2021, at 09:35, Marc Chantreux > > wrote: >> >> There is no way you'll manage requests like .In, .Fn .Vt, .Ft, .Fn, .Op >> with commonmark. > > > Food for thought… though in my opinion the usage strings an

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> On 22 Apr 2021, at 09:35, Marc Chantreux wrote: > > There is no way you'll manage requests like .In, .Fn .Vt, .Ft, .Fn, .Op > with commonmark. Food for thought… though in my opinion the usage strings and the synopsis are like a table of contents, automatically generated. How about: #usa

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> On 21 Apr 2021, at 18:56, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > > 1. Sorry, Markdown is a *terrible* choice. Which dialect? It's simply not > standardized enough. > It's also semantically rather weak, especially near tables. I was expecting that one :-) Let me put differently. Markdown is the style.

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> Mhmm, what `pandoc` provides is quite nice, and I have successfully > used it to produce technical manuals in various formats. pandoc is vastly superior to all their concurrents (except Rmarkdown which seems to be interesting but i haven't tested by myself) but the problem is many people use oth

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

Le Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 02:09:18PM +1000, John Gardner a écrit : > Markdown has one feature: readability. That's literally it. IMHO, the mdoc dialect is easier to read when it comes to describe functions, types and so on ... markdown on the other hand is quicker to write. regards marc

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

hello, > I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an alternate > format for UNIX man-pages. > (Cf. https://github.com/marcastel/marcastel/discussions/7) I used POD (perldoc) for decades and i'm very fan of pandoc for many years now (i use it for many things from bills to

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

>> I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an >> alternate format for UNIX man-pages. > > You picked the worst possible markup imaginable. Not just for man > pages, but for any technical documentation, *period*. If you're > interested in "modernising", I suggest rewriti

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> > I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an > alternate format for UNIX man-pages. You picked the worst possible markup imaginable. Not just for man pages, but for any technical documentation, *period*. If you're interested in "modernising", I suggest rewriting man pag

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

JM Marcastel : > Dear all, > > I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an alternate > format for UNIX man-pages. > (Cf. https://github.com/marcastel/marcastel/discussions/7) > > Rather than re-inventing the wheel I would ideally like this to become part > of an existing

[groff] Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

> I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an > alternate format for UNIX man-pages. For what it is worth ... This is a very old story and I might not have all the details correct, but the basic message fits here. And the basic message is: Once you have a stylized

Re: Modernising UNIX manpages.

Hello all, I suggest that this does not upset the Linux man pages project; that conversion tools should be able to generate standard man format, in view of the number of tools that assume this, eg RosettaMan and tkman. Denis On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 05:46:58 +0200 JM Marcastel wrote: > Dear all, >

Modernising UNIX manpages.

Dear all, I would like to investigate the possibility of using Markdown as an alternate format for UNIX man-pages. (Cf. https://github.com/marcastel/marcastel/discussions/7) Rather than re-inventing the wheel I would ideally like this to become part of an existing tool (mandoc, groff, …). I wo