Re: [groff] groff as the basis for comprehensive documentation?

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi Steve,

> I'm not sure why you consider `.\&' important: is that for
> end-of-sentence recognition?

No, the opposite, it's to stop an end-of-sentence character being taken
as the end of a sentence.

> I've never used double spaces for sentences, but I recognize there are
> good arguments in favour of it.

If your input has only a single space after the full stop that is the
end of a sentence but not the end of a line, then it will typeset
different to one that does fall at the end of a line.  Compare
`appropriate.' and `wrong.'.

    $ nroff <<\E | grep .
    .na
    Indeed, I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not
    appropriate. In fact, it was wrong.
    It constituted a critical lapse in judgment and a personal failure
    on my part for which I am solely and completely responsible.
    E
    Indeed, I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not
    appropriate. In fact, it was wrong.  It constituted a critical
    lapse in judgment and a personal failure on my part for which I
    am solely and completely responsible.
    $ 

I prefer the troff norm of a wider space, but have to look out for `Data
by Spock et al.\& shows' because editing the input might place the `.\&'
at the end of a line.

-- 
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy