Update of bug#65241 (group groff):

                Severity:              3 - Normal => 1 - Wish               

    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comment #1:

[comment #0 original submission:]
> Buried in the novella that is bug #62921 is this observation:
> 
> "groff's _ms_ and _me_ have support for bold-italic already (and have
> for decades), and it wouldn't be hard to add it to our _mm_ either"
> 
> (This ticket merely notes that Branden has noted the feature gap.  I
> know of no -mm users who have requested this feature, and the
> functionality is already available to -mm users with appropriate base
> roff requests or escapes.)

I'm personally unlikely to tackle this due to its implications for the
_mm_ macro name space.

Consider first that _mm_ has macros for selecting roman, bold, and
italic faces called `R`, `B`, and `I`, respectively.

Next consider that _mm_ also has font alternation macros like _man_;
these are `BI`, `BR`, `IB`, `IR`, `RB`, and `RI`.

Notice the preƫxisting status of a macro called `BI`.

Finally, consider that even we had a macro for switching to the
bold-italic face (maybe `FBI`), orthogonality would suggest that we'd
need to add several more, to complete the Cartesian product of
alternation with the new `BI` font.

BBI
BIB
BIR
RBI
IBI
BII

I think this would become hard to decipher.

What I would suggest to _groff mm_ users instead is to temporarily remap
fonts in a context where bold-italic is desired.  My suspicion is that
in most practical typesetting contexts, this will arise mainly in
situations where the non-italic face is already bold anyway.  That is
the shape of solutions I have applied in _groff man_, which doesn't
expose the bold-italic face, but does _use_ it in (sub)section headings
if it infers that the configured heading font (`HF` string) represents a
bold typeface.  It then temporarily remaps `I` to `BI` when setting the
headings.

Regards,
Branden



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?65241>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/


Reply via email to