[Groff] Re: some details missing from your patch

[Gaius Mulley]

Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

> A month ago I requested:
> 
> > > Please send me documentation diffs for the `.tag' and `.taga'
> > > requests and the new -s option for grohtml.
> 
> In your answer you write:
> 
>   [...]
> 
>   The @code{tag} request emits a device special ditroff command
>   @emph{without} any space between itself and the next glyph.
>   Importantly it is also issued immediately after the previous troff
>   state (if any were emitted).
> 
> If I understand that correctly, tags issued with `.tag' are emitted
> twice under particular circumstances, right?  Can you provide a small
> example?
> 
>   The @code{taga} request delays emitting the special to the device
>   driver until the @code{troff} state changes. The @code{troff} state
>   is defined as the combination of:

yes fine, I guess it makes sense to add this into groff.texinfo with
the tag documentation requested in the previous email.

> As a continuation of my other mail to the list I wonder whether it
> makes sense to have three actually tag commands:
> 
>   .tag -- a new request which is really the equivalent to \X'...'.

this emits a tag with a tailing space between itself and the
next glyph.

> 
> .tag1 -- this is currently called .tag

this emits a tag without a tailing space between itself and the next
glyph. Maybe the name could be changed to `.tagns' or do you wish to
keep to the numeral extension?

> 
>   .taga -- stays the same
> 
> What do you think?

yes I like this idea, I was thinking along similar line when
developing it but backed off when I imagined the size of changes
required (with the mega patch etc)

Gaius