Update of bug #64877 (project groff):
Status: None => Invalid
Assigned to: None => gbranden
Open/Closed: Open => Closed
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #1:
[comment #0 original submission:]
> Subject: src/roff/groff/groff.1.man: use "-K enc" instead of "-k"
>
> See for example
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2023-08/msg00135.html
> and more with the same subject "Baffling accented glyphs issue",
> and
> .../2023-11/msg00010.hmml.
>
> Instead of
> .B \-k
> Run
> .MR preconv @MAN1EXT@
> preprocessor.
> .
> Refer to its man page for its behavior if neither of
> write something like
> .B \-k
> Use "-K enc" instead of "-k" when the encoding (enc) is known.
> .
> Refer to
> .MR preconv's @MAN1EXT@
> man page for its behavior if neither of
> +verbatim+
> The user can know what encoding is used in the input files,
> but groff (preconv) can't with just "-k".
You are not interpreting the man page correctly.
The imperative mood used to describe the function of the command option
communicates the direction that the human user is imparting to the _groff_
program by supplying the option.
It is not prescriptive advice to the reader of the man page. Man pages
sometimes do that too; one is expected to infer that from context.
If you were to consistently apply the interpretation you've offered here, you
would run every _groff_ command with every possible option, and rapidly run
into trouble with usage errors and non-zero exit statues because not all of
the options can sensibly be used simultaneously.
Closing as ill-conceived.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64877>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
