But xhtml-1.0+ *requires* that tags be represented in *lower*
case *only*, and any mixed or upper case representation is
(strictly) invalid. AIUI, today's web authors really should be
striving towards xhtml standards compliance; in this respect,
grohtml's use of lower case is alread
Read it again -- the spec itself uses upper- and lowercase for
readability, but HTML is case insensitive so , ,
, and are all equally valid.
I am corrected. Thank you.
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinf
Well
http://directory.fsf.org/GNU/groff.html
http://groff.ffii.org
all have links to the source repository. But
http://www.gnu.org/software/groff/groff.html
indeed miss it.
David, can you fix this, please?
I've added a link.
__
> grohtml outputs elements/tags as lowercase, not uppercase as
> required by the HTML recommendations.
This is a contradiction. A `recommendation' can never be `required'.
I'll stick with requirement. Otherwise, what's the point of a
standard?
D. E. Evans writes:
>
> Though not a big deal for the big web browsers, with error
> correcting facilities (or many of the search engines that have
> similar error correction), shouldn't all HTML entities be upper
> case, and all attributes be case sensitive
> URL:
> http://floppsie.comp.glam.ac.uk/Papers/grohtml-paper/grohtml.html
A side note:
Though not a big deal for the big web browsers, with error
correcting facilities (or many of the search engines that have
similar error correction), shouldn't all HTML entities be upper
case, and all a
We definitely need a good guide for writing man pages, based on our
discussion -- something like a man-to-html.howto. This guide should
contain (as an appendix) those macro definitions which a man writer
can then simply copy and paste.
I agree. Ironically, what we have is currently i
Download the groff home page and mail my german version to the list
or to you, Werner?
To me. I'll add it as ./groff/index.de.html. Don't forget the
translation link at the bottom.
If we get enough documents to translate, I'll break up the
directories, and Werner can get you access to
http://groff.ffii.org/groff/contrib/documentation/utp/
As a side note, the address for the mailing-list given there seems
wrong also.
I don't have access to the ffii.org page, so it has been abandoned.
I hadn't delved into some of those extras. If there's anything from
that site that yo
You mean that you ask someone to translate the groff web page into a
foreign language?
Yes, that's what I mean.
Well, before doing that it would be interesting to know which
languages groff enthusiasts are really using -- I'm not talking about
man pages but real documents...
I agr
Our website doesn't have any translations currently. Are there any
particular languages that would be helpful or useful for me to
arrange?
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 05:35:09PM -0400, Larry Kollar wrote:
> Does anyone have any pic code that would make drawing flow charts a
> little smoother? I've been presented with a flow chart (done in Visio)
> and think it would be easier to recode it in pic than it would to get
> a dec
> and which, if either would be most suitable for producing a
> magazine?
This is difficult to say. In case you use, say, three columns a page,
I suggest TeX due to its better paragraph formatting capabilities. If
you need a plain-text output also, then roff is probably the better
Please, tell us, how do you use groff PS output.
I use PS for printing school papers, letters, etc. PS is my primary
output mode for groff.
Do you use fonts supplied with groff or install your own font files?
I use those referenced via groff.
The bug-groff mailing list was previously accepting mail from
anyone, thus unfortunately passing on plenty of spam. With
Werner's approval, I've now configured it to hold messages from
"strangers", so there may be a small delay for first-time posters.
Perhaps this could be supplimente
There is no need to support all encodings that Emacs provides, since
1. probably a majority of users already use other text editors than Emacs,
This is not true, first of all (I'm a vi user, so bias is not
part of this). Second, Emacs is the GNU editor, and can't be
blown off arbitrarily.
> Mac sed is the BSD sed (OS X takes a lot from FreeBSD).
> If I install GNU sed I get the same results as you.
Please tell us the results which BSD sed produces. I want to
check whether this is a bug, an imcompatibility, or a non-POSIX
expression. BTW, do you know by chance the m
> . Copy `groff.html' to ffii.org.
>
> What is the path and access method for ffii.org?
Please explain.
SSH?
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
> I wonder if this is on the ffii site, not gnu.org. Is the gnu.org
> page (at /software/groff) a mirror of the ffii site?
For simplicity, they are the same.
Apparently not, since I've uploaded a change to gnu.org which is
not reflected at ffii.org.
> If so, is seperate access neede
The GNU project has tried for years to kill man pages (with little
success) by ignoring them. I'm not proposing that texinfo get ignored,
I'm suggesting that there is at least one person out here (me) who would
do some real work on roff's docs if the format was roff. From what I
ca
> Perhaps only rms, and a couple of others actually use 'GNU OS,'
> but those who do, use info. I wouldn't say they it is right to
> call all GNU OS users, developers.
This sounds like you are basing your arguments on people who use a
100% pure GNU system. If that's the case, that
Having info as the only default is an unfortunate decision IMHO. It
makes sense for big projects, but otherwise this guideline should be
ignored, or rather, the man page should have priority.
I don't remember the details, but I seem to remember Stallman's
reasoning was Donald Knuth's inv
> So again, a *GNU* user will be looking to info everytime, not a
> man page. As a BSD user, I would look to a man page everytime,
> since man is the default for BSD (as for any other UNIX platform).
> The irony of groff as a GNU project is not lost on me.
I'm sorry, but I can't he
> So again, a *GNU* user will be looking to info everytime, not a
> man page.
Wrong. A GNU *developer* may look to info; judging by the tone of
Perhaps only rms, and a couple of others actually use 'GNU OS,'
but those who do, use info. I wouldn't say they it is right to
call all GNU OS
D. E. Evans wrote:
> I agree. However, as a GNU program, GNU users are going to
> automatically look at info, not man...
Says who? I'm a GNU/Linux user, and I will go for the man page
first, every time.
The GNU OS developer guidelines are explicit in demanding
I don't -- and won't -- use EMACS: I can't stand it! I do, and
want to, use vim. I like, and want to have, good man pages which
list all the essentials of the behaviour of commands. I rarely
want to get into the labyrinth of a texinfo document (though I'm
pleased it's there I need th
I won't give up on groff.texinfo. This consequently means that we
need a groff2texinfo converter (or groff2info to get the more
important info files) in case the source files are in groff
format. Personally, I *really* like the indexing features of
`info' which are quite power
> 1. The image is too large (horizontally). What about keeping
> only the GNU head and printing press? (The title is already
> prominently displayed below it.)
Agreed. The text could be split onto two lines, the second
indented from the first.
Since there is already a title disp
Things I dislike about /software/groff:
1. The image is too large (horizontally). What about keeping
only the GNU head and printing press? (The title is already
prominently displayed below it.)
2. Should it be GNU roff (or runoff), not GNU Troff? Ditroff would
probably be more appropriate if s
I think that limiting groff to "documentation, memos, letters,
and manuals" is not right.
I think we're thinking along the same lines. Your illustrations
prove the point I was making, not detract from it. Perhaps place
more emphasis on the 'and so on.'
___
out of place on the net.. (maybe). For someone familiar with groff -ms
it is as simple as writing a document with .TL, .SH., .LP, .PSPIC.
I completely agree. If you've written a document with groff, for
whatever reason, it only makes sense to output it to html for
publication to the web. I
Some comments on groff and all the requests regarding document
formats, and compatibility. One of the things I like about roff,
is that it is focused on a pretty unique area of use: print manuals
and documents. The introduction of pdfroff has long been needed,
but I think that only shows my point
For my editing work I also use joe, not emacs :-) But the built-in
Lisp interpreter of emacs allows to do mighty things...
This brings up a funny story from when I first started as chief
webmaster. There's several files on fencepost (there used to be
*lots* of files, including on the FTP se
Comments (and patches!) to improve this are highly welcome.
I'm all ears (or eyes, as the case may be).
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
Before adding a note to the PROBLEMS file, does anyone know of
other platforms that would require a reconfiguration of man?
SunOS? OpenServer? The other BSDs?
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
In the case of SGR sequences, unless the user specifically uses the
`--enable-sgr' option, `configure' will attempt to run the specified
`nroff' command, to format a minimal manpage, and `grep' the output for
an identifiable SGR sequence, before adding the `-c' option to the
configur
> I'm not completely happy with the markup that groff puts out for
> this purpose.
Details, please. Maybe it can improved easily.
The first thing that comes to mind is that there is text before
the DTD. This kills compliance support for IE, if not some other
browsers.
I'll provide a m
This makes sense. So how many official developers does groff have?
4, plus Werner. I don't know how active the others are.
>It would be nice to provide some sample scripts, or perhaps
>
> I think this is an excellent idea.
I realized after I posted this that it sounded like
This is great! Excuse my ignorance, but how exactly is one made
a developer of a specific project? I'm just curious how these
things work and what this means -- apropos of nothing
Talk with Werner, and submit your request via Savannah.
Myself, I've been writing documents in groff f
> However, I think a better idea would be to do it through the
> configure script. Did I overlook an option already present?
What shall the *groff* configure script do? Shouldn't this be rather
something in the *man* configure script?
The removal of the escape charact
. Copy the new stuff from NEWS to webpage.ms and adjust it to be
valid groff code.
. Say `make' to generate `webpage.html'.
. Copy `webpage.html' to gnu.org, manually adjust the links to the
two images, then replace the old with the new version by renaming
it
welcome to the world of groff.
Thank you.
> I have just been made a developer of the groff project to assist
> with your documentation, and with the texinfo manual, (and perhaps
> your website?).
Please do so! For testing and educational purposes, the web site is
directly crea
estive--are welcome and needed
so that I can serve you best.
--
D. E. Evans (aka Sinuhe) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
Ah, yes, there are two competing `man' projects. Which one are you
using? I'm quite sure that you can get the same effect with probably
other means. In case you find it out please report it to the list so
I can update the docs.
This is the original BSD man started in 1987. OpenBSD
Read man grotty (if you can see it through the escape sequences!).
man grotty works fine.
variable GROFF_NO_SGR - this will revert grotty to the old behavior of
This does not appear to work. (By set, I presume you mean add a
value of 1?)
backspacing and overprinting. Essentially,
Since you are upgrading from 1.15 to 1.19.2, reading the README would
have helped:
My bad. I had overlooked the relevance of that passage by
rushing through the README too fast.
Note that you have to use the `-R' option of `less' to make SGR
escapes display correctly. On the
I have installed 1.19.2 (via todays cvs checkout) onto an OpenBSD
3.7 system, (which uses 1.15 by default). This also required an
upgrade of texinfo to 4.8, (both of which I installed from source).
I get the following result when accessing the man page for groff (though
texinfo's came out fine):
47 matches
Mail list logo
