Re: [Groff] folding preconv into soelim?

[Gaius Mulley]

Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

> After some thinking I now believe that it is better to fold the
> preconv preprocessor into soelim.  The reasons are obvious: Any `.so'
> request should be handled by preconv too -- the alternative is to make
> soelim call preconv, but I have the feeling that this is a bad idea,
> given the many hassles with pipes on non-Unix platforms.
> 
> I further believe that the `.mso' request should *not* be involved in
> encoding conversion issues.
> 
> Comments?

Hi Werner,

sounds like an excellent idea - my only slight worry is that `.mso' is
treated differently to `.so' as it would force `.mso' to be only used
to include macros rather than text. Just wondering what happens if
text needs to be encoded within something.tmac ?

Gaius