Larry Kollar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > > > It sounds like a good idea, but there are so many potential > > > enhancements that would make tbl easier to live with that it's > > > almost worth a rewrite. > > > > Hmm, can you post a TODO, please? > > My short list is primarily cosmetic (the goal is to require a minimal > amount of primitive markup) and there are workarounds to most of > them. > > 1 HTML support (would probably require changes to the groff wrapper > to pass a command-line option to tbl for -Thtml)
yes this would be a good modification.. I was wondering whether it would be better for tbl to emit .HTML <tag> sequences for whether it would be better for tbl to emit grohtml meta tags which post-grohtml detects and converts into appropriate html tags. I'm leaning towards the later as post-grohtml can produce tidier output and deferring a decision late in the pipeline should mean one can catch combinations of event tags. On the other hand it is more complex :-( > > Additionally, I ask you to further test Joachim's `HDtbl' package > > > > ftp://ftp.uni-heidelberg.de/pub/HDtbl/0.91 > > The introduction is here, if anyone wants to see what it's doing: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2005-12/msg00003.html yes, really useful to examine and borrow ideas from.. regards, Gaius _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list Groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
