Follow-up Comment #13, bug #68543 (group groff): [comment #12 comment #12:] > Ingo, what do you think?
I'm not sure why you think i might be interested in this ticket, and i'm not
sure i fully understand what you are trying to achieve here. In particular, i
don't understand what exactly users would be expected to assign to the new
\*(CF string. The discussion below seems inconstent to me. In most places
including the ticket title, you call it a "font family", but in some places,
you talk about a "code font" or "example font" (rather than a family) and
compare it to the abominable \*(MF, the existence of which i strongly disagree
with, and which in fact allows selecting a wrong font (with a wrong default
setting on top of that), not only allowing the selection of a font family.
What i do regard as important is that that users must *not* be offered a way
of changing the font style of .Li or .Ql or .Dl or .Bd -literal or .Bf
-literal to anything that is not a constant-width font because that is the
traditional font style for representing a literal display, no matter whether
it's an in-line display or a one-line display or a multi-line display. So for
example, setting the font style of .Li to roman or italic or bold must not be
supported.
I don't care *at all* about font families. I'll use whatever font family is
the default, and i'll recommend always using the default font family, and i'll
find it mildly annoying if code and/or documentation becomes longer by
supporting a choice of font families, but as long as this does not harm the
correct font style being used, i'll mostly shrug.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68543>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
