Re: <OK> [Groff] Simplifying groff documentation

[mhobgood]

On Dec 24, 2006, at 12:01 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> Gunnar Ritter <address@hidden>:
> > But I think the most important question for troff people is,
> > where is a complete, high-quality converter for
> >
> >            +-------------+/       +===========+
> >            | XML-DocBook |=======>|   troff   |  ?
> >            +-------------+\       +===========+
> >
> > With <?troff .request?> processing instructions, this makes
> > it possible to retain all the typographical aspects we like.
> >
> > XSL-FO to troff is also worth consideration.
>
> XSL-FO to troff would be far more appropriate.  XSL and troff are  
> at about
> the same level; thus, you wouldn't have to wire in all the policy/ 
> styling
> decisions you would in a DocBook->troff renderer.

For those of us not up to speed on all the current jargon, would you  
explain
what XSL and FO are?

Cordially,
Michael Hobgood