Keith Marshall writes: > On 06/11/14 12:30, Anthony J. Bentley wrote: > > By ASCII I meant specifically ASCII output. I use UTF-8 terminals and > > the patch was intended to improve how the nroff output looks in that case. > > That you use UTF-8 terminals is completely irrelevant; you are confusing > two distinct concepts here
I appreciate what you're saying, but I was not confused in this respect. > -- a character encoding (UTF-8), and the > *font* used for display. No matter that the encoding is UTF-8, > depending on configured choice of font, your "typographic" quotes may > look nicely balanced, or horrendously ghastly; what looks nice to you > may look hideous to others, with a different font configuration. This is technically correct, but just as irrelevant. Given UTF-8 output, mdoc *already* uses U+201C/U+201C for double quotes except in the case of Qq/Qo/Qc (where it must use straight quotes by definition), \(dq (ditto), and %T, and maybe a few more low-level roff cases I don't know about. This patch only makes nroff be more consistent. That's what I meant by saying "to improve how the nroff output looks." -- Anthony J. Bentley
