Hi Ingo, > > ancillary to backend improvement, there's a pressing need for groff > > advocacy. > > Sure, that may also help to attract not just users, but developers, > too. However, I don't think that advocacy needs to be limited to > advertising groff for writing novels (and mathematical treatises, of > course). I do not consider it detrimental to advertise the basic roff > macro syntax for manuals, as well.
It seems to me that coders in particular would be happy with troff syntax if got over the initial hurdle. Perhaps when we see a missing man page, or one with errors that gives poor formatting, for a program we like and are interested in, we can try and find the time to patch, suggest, or encourage an improvement. Some of those programmers might take more of an interest in troff as they realise it and its preprocessors are not limited to TTY man pages. After all, we (the list) collectively re-entered UTP. Cheers, Ralph.
