Re: [Groff] more html macros needed

[Jon Snader]

On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 12:24:46AM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> 
> > I don't believe that we should be
> > trying to emulate the LaTeX syntax.  Rather we should try, when
> > possible, to follow the original paradigm of having a request remain
> > active until the next paragraph (e.g. until the next, possibly
> > implicit, .RT in the ms macros).
> 
> But this not always the right thing.  [I dare to say that in most
> cases it is not the right thing, but this is my personal opinion.]
> For example, mdoc offers for all quoting macros three forms.  One for
> a line, and two to open and close a quotation.  Example: .Aq, .Ao, and
> .Ac -- so Bernd's idea is not far away from what existing groff macros
> already provide.  I have similar things in mind: one line-oriented
> form, and a starting/closing pair in case the former doesn't work.
> 

Of course it's not *always* the right thing--that's why I said ``when
possible.''  I have lots of macros that do follow the ``start-end''
model.  For example, I use P1 to start a program listing and P2 to end
it.  I also use plenty of macros that follow the ``do this until the next
paragraph'' model.

Perhaps I misunderstood your intent.  I read your remarks as saying you
felt we should move to a LaTeX type syntax where we use the ``start-end''
model (semi-)exclusively.  I was merely offering an opposing opinion by
remarking that it defeats one of key advantages (in my mind at least) of
troff over TeX and LaTeX--brevity.

> > As I said before, if you want LaTeX (or its syntax) you know where
> > to find it.
> 
> This is something completely different.  I talked about the concept
> and not the syntax.
> 

Please don't misunderstand me.  Lot's of people, including much loved
members of my family, prefer and use LaTeX.  There's nothing wrong with
that.  Indeed, I'd be the last one to accuse Don Knuth of lacking aesthetic
taste and technical mastery in these matters.  I am merely saying that if
you *do* prefer that style, then for goodness sake use TeX or LaTeX, but
please allow those of us who prefer the troff style to use ours.  Writing
a set of troff macros that looks like LaTeX seems to me to be in the same
vein as those who use the C preprocessor to turn C into something like
Pascal.

Jon Snader