Re: [Groff] Splitting groff(7)

[Werner LEMBERG]

> IMHO the man page groff(7) is too long.  I propose to split off the
> predefined language elements into man pages of their own:
> 
> groff_macros, groff_escapes, and groff_registers

I'm strictly against this.  The worst example I know of is how Perl 5
has been splitted in 39(!) sub manuals.  I agree that documenting Perl
is not possible in a single manual page, but the amount of data in
groff(7) is sufficiently small to stay as it is.

> The truncated groff(7) would still describe all of the groff
> language concepts, but refer to the new man pages for the predefined
> elements.

Aren't the predefined elements part of the groff language?  Would you
describe, say, C without describing its operators and keywords?

> How far has the info file been processed?  Can we now remove the
> language parts of the out-dated troff(1)?

Unfortunately, no.  troff(1) is still the primary source for all
extensions of groff.  While adding new features, I make sure that it
is documented in troff(1) and groff(7) -- I think the latter really
covers all requests, escapes, and registers of groff.  If time
permits, I add something to groff.texinfo.


   Werner