>> Admittedly, this is badly documented if at all. I would be glad if
>> you could provide patches to improve that.
>
> The two-pass method is described in the info file, but not in the
> man page, so I will add it to the man page and modify both man and
> info by:
Thanks in advance!
> a. add
Werner,
> For me it works [...]
Sorry, I checked it again and it had the expected
effect. Must have been doing something wrong.
> ??? I have this line in font/devlatin1/R:
>
> `A 24 0 0300
I already got it and wrote about it, but the post
probably made it to the list too late.
> These
>> I tried adding a new line to ...\font\devutf8\r:
>>
>> u0410 24 0 0x411
>>
>> deliberately incrementing the device code by one,
>> and it did work!
>
> Doing this you are overriding the default mapping built into
> grohtml.
^^^
This is a typo, of course. I mean the utf8 device
> I tried adding a new line to ...\font\devutf8\r:
>
> u0410 24 0 0x411
>
> deliberately incrementing the device code by one,
> and it did work!
Doing this you are overriding the default mapping built into grohtml.
> Why doesn't the same action (when tested with the same input file)
> w
> Now I am trying to understand a very simple case: for the latin1
> device, no font definition contains a glyph named [`A],
??? I have this line in font/devlatin1/R:
`A 24 0 0300
Werner
> [...] When I process this file using the following MSDOS batch
> script
>
>type %1 | groff -mkoi8-r -t -Thtml > %2
>
> groff outputs six (one per each symbol) warning messages of the
> form:
>
>stdin:1: warning: can't find special character '',
These warning messages are harmless.
Myself:
> Now I am trying to understand a very simple case:
> for the latin1 device, no font definition contains
> a glyph named [`A], while it is this glyph that
> [char192] maps to (by latin1.tmac). And this works
> correctly without any warning messages. Where does
> groff take the definiti
