groff
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [groff] 01/04: grn(1): Make options discussion a section.


From: Ingo Schwarze
Subject: Re: [groff] 01/04: grn(1): Make options discussion a section.
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 08:11:11 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23)

Hi Werner,

Werner LEMBERG wrote on Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 07:45:47AM +0100:
> Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> Branden Robinson wrote:

>>> Also consistently double-quote multi-word arguments to the .SH
>>> macro, for consistency with the rest of the page and (most) other
>>> groff man pages.

>> That's both useless and harmless - in a word, cargo cult.

> I disagree.  Just imagine that you have a title with more than nine
> words: To be able to display it correctly on old non-groff systems you
> *must* use double quotes.  For this reason I recommend to always use
> double quotes, which will never cause a problem.

Oh, i no longer considered that point because in BSD manual pages,
compatibity with formatters having the historic argument limitation
was generally dropped about eight years ago, so using such old
formatters is no longer viable for modern manual page display.

> In other words, I prefer to have users apply a recipe that will always
> work.  Telling them `Always quote a multi-word title' is IMHO easier
> to remember than saying `Use quotes if you have more than nine words
> in a title'.

Fair enough, this one does little harm.  But other similar
recommendations that would be required to keep stuff working with
historic formatters are bad ideas, in particular in mdoc(7), like
"always use Xo after It" (don't recommend that!), so i'm not sure
what the point is in advocating some compat practices that are easy
to follow but dropping others that would cause serious ugliness and
complication in the manual page source code.

> Perhaps a future release of groff can completely drop compatibility to
> old non-groff systems, but I guess this won't happen in the
> forthcoming version.

I think it is high time to no longer require authors to write modern
manual pages in such a way that they work on systems from decades
ago.

Compatibility is about making sure that historic documents can be
formatted with modern formatters, not the other way round: the
inverse would impede progress and put undue burden on manual page
authors.

Yours,
  Ingo



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]