On Mon Apr 10, 2023 at 8:42 AM EDT, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> > > troff lays out its input.
> > > The input has been placed on the page.
> > > It is typeset.
> > > It is set.
> > >
> > > troff chapter.tr >chapter.set
> >
> > $ file chapter.set
> > chapter.set: ditroff output text for PostScript, ASCII text
> >
> > Wouldn’t “.ditroff” be more appropriate?
>
> The question was what else to use other than .dit or .ditroff given
> Kernighan has ‘never been fond if it’.
>
> I don't like ditroff either. It's too long as a suffix. Given troff is
> tee-roff is it die-tee-roff, unfortunate, or dee-eye-tee-roff? Both are
> long to say.
Since ditroff stands for “Device Independent troff”, what about
something like ‘dee-vie-roff’ or ‘di-vie-roff’ depending on how you
pronounce “device”?* I think we should avoid changing file suffixes as
much as possible, given that the *roff + macros suffixes are already out
of hand.
Cheers,
--
DJ Chase
They, Them, Theirs
{gemini,https,ipns}://dj-chase.com/
* We could also abandon the whole “‘nroff’ is too hard to say because
god forbid we use a glide” (like how “children” and “oxen” are in the
same declension because “children” is really “childen” with an r sound
to make it easier to say) thing and start saying “roff”, “nerroff”,
“troff”, “groff”, and “ditroff”.
