Re: macOS Terminal man page URL format

[John Gardner]

>
> I would prefer to hold macOS up to ridicule in this respect in hopes of
> motivating its users (and developers) to standardize on something.


By "standardise", are you specifically referring to a *de jure* standard?
macOS's x-man-page:// scheme is only a *de facto* standard, but it's by far
the oldest, best-known, and widely-supported man-page URL scheme on macOS,
even recently.

Yes, but you have actually encountered these in practical experience.


It wasn't a practical encounter. I was actively researching how authors
have approached the issue of man-page hyperlinks in the past (not just on
macOS, but *any* Unix-like system). I did this to make Roff.js's URI
handling functions as airtight as possible.

That creates more places for something to go wrong.
>

Yeah, true. Forget about the callback idea, then. :-)

BTW, what file should I apply your patch to? I'm getting an error when I
attempt to apply it:

$ git apply ~/Downloads/macOS-man-grief.diff
error: patch failed: tmac/man.local:14
error: tmac/man.local: patch does not apply

Remember, this is with the latest Groff sources, which still aren't
building successfully on macOS…

On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 06:55, G. Branden Robinson <
g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> At 2023-02-07T06:26:22+1100, John Gardner wrote:
> > Then how about a callback? It could be called with the relevant
> > parameters, and authors can use plain ol' Roff to specify the
> > hyperlink format.
>
> That creates more places for something to go wrong.  Also I don't want
> people to get the idea that they should be defining this callback _in
> the man page document_.  That is very much the wrong way to go.
>
> > I think we're on two different pages here. That last list of URL
> > formats was intended to illustrate the potential for variation amidst
> > software authors. It's very easy for somebody to "invent" their own
> > man page URL scheme, one that may be partially- or wholly-incompatible
> > with other, better-established schemes.
>
> Yes, but you have actually encountered these in practical experience.
>
> > Ultimately, only Terminal.app's scheme (x-man-page://) should be taken
> > seriously by Groff.
>
> I would prefer to hold macOS up to ridicule in this respect in hopes of
> motivating its users (and developers) to standardize on something.[1]
> What I'm calling "format 1" would be best, but I know that NIH syndrome
> dominates a lot of corporate software development.  And some elsewhere.
>
> If I had to use macOS for some reason, I'd go out of my way to use xterm
> rather than Terminal.app.  Lack of man page hyperlinks is not a deal-
> breaker for me personally.  I have not begun a campaign to talk Thomas
> Dickey into supporting OSC 8 in xterm.  I do not expect it to be easy.
>
> > > apropos(1) is not in groff's department.
> >
> > Right, sorry. I keep getting my wires crossed when discussing man(1)
> > and Groff at once…
>
> No worries.  I think a lot of people are fuzzy about the distinction, so
> opportunities like this to set the record straight are to be seized. :)
>
> Regards,
> Branden
>
> [1] You can see that I'd be brilliant in corporate communications.
>