Michael(tm) Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I think doing that would be an abuse of . I hope
> doclifter isn't currently using that way in other
> places. It's not supposed to be a means to indent things. A
> particular processing application may or or may not render it with
> an indent. It would be
Michael(tm) Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> They do now. I finished adding table support to the DocBook
> Project manpages stylesheet in March of last year -- for release
> 1.69.1 or so of the stylesheets. (The current release that distros
> should be packaging is 1.71.1).
Great, I can get rid of an
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2006-12-28 18:07 -0500:
> In translating to DocBook, these indented displays would be
> rendered with various nestings of and
> tags. I don't presently do this, because I don't presently notice
> whether .DS has an indent argument or not -- but if .DS wit
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2006-12-28 09:15 -0500:
> There's a bit of a problem in the other direction, unfortunately.
> Norm Walsh's XML-DocBook stylesheets have a man-markup output mode,
> but it doesn't render tables to TBL markup.
They do now. I finished adding table support to
D. E. Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> P.S. I know that Eric is shooting for something more dynamic, but
> does this have to be made anymore complicated than a better export
> facility for groff (improvements or replace for grohtml that is
> both standardized for HTML, and perhaps has an XSLT function
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
I wrote a template for how to write man pages back about 1989 or 1990
for use inside of HP. I think the file name was how_to_write_manpages.1
and the title line was
.TH how_to_write_manpages(1)
or something very similar.
It was a template that had the coding and explained what to do
where and ho
Yes, this is exactly what we need! I find that most people
tend to take an existing man page to use as the basis for a
new page anyhow, often with interesting results. A template
file that is designed for this purpose would be much better,
although we may need more than one -- the structure of pa
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 10:38:39AM -0500, Larry Kollar wrote:
> :
> When you're writing a
> document (like a manpage) that can be displayed in a large number of ways
> -- text on a console, PDF/print (allowing the user to choose the point size
> with the -S option, remember), or HTML... or
Hi Mike,
> > http://home.alltel.net/kollar/groff/effman.tar.gz
>
> The gzipped tarfile isn't found.
There's http://home.alltel.net/kollar/groff/effman.html
Perhaps that's it.
Cheers,
Ralph.
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists
Larry,
The gzipped tarfile isn't found.
Cordially,
Mike Hobgood
On Dec 29, 2006, at 9:38 AM, Larry Kollar wrote:
http://home.alltel.net/kollar/groff/effman.tar.gz
___
Groff mailing list
Groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/g
Hi Gunnar,
> > > > 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.
Agreed. I've be
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 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 pa
> 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.
That was one of the thrusts of my "Writing Effective
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/xbd_chap12.html
>
> However, those rules are not really helpful IMHO in our discussion how
> such macros should look like.
It gives an overview about the types of arguments that need
to be handled
> > 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.
>
> How about creating a SourceForge project
> > I tend to advocate the use of .DS/.DE, .TQ, .EX/.EE, .SY, .OP, and
> > probably other nifty things to be used within man pages,
> > *together* with its macro definitions in the preamble. This gives
> > us both a decent markup and backwards compatibility.
>
> This is certainly an acceptable p
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.
How about
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tend to advocate the use of .DS/.DE, .TQ, .EX/.EE, .SY, .OP, and
> probably other nifty things to be used within man pages, *together*
> with its macro definitions in the preamble. This gives us both a
> decent markup and backwards compatibility.
Thi
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > .TP++ or .TQ
> >
> > Looks like a normal paragraph break, but continues a .TP list.
> > Generally people just use .sp for this, which is why .sp may be
> > the only low-level request that's truly essential for man pages.
>
> How shall .sp replace .TQ in thi
> > If doclifter handles all these cases as well as you already
> > described there is no need for an exception to man format.
>
> It's going to be Werner's decision, ultimately.
I tend to advocate the use of .DS/.DE, .TQ, .EX/.EE, .SY, .OP, and
probably other nifty things to be used within man p
> .TP++ or .TQ
>
> Looks like a normal paragraph break, but continues a .TP list.
> Generally people just use .sp for this, which is why .sp may be
> the only low-level request that's truly essential for man pages.
How shall .sp replace .TQ in this particular case? Please give an
example for thi
> Personally, I would prefer having .nf/.in/.fi used in man pages
> over .DS/.DE -- the display macros hold the contents on a single
> page and when writing man pages that might be rendered in plain text,
> PDF/PS, or HTML, I'm not crazy about this model.
I like .DS/.DE very much, but it isn't us
I spent many years writing man pages for kernel/driver interfaces
and the code examples there were often pretty long... It would be
good if the section 2 and section 3 pages had more code examples on
them -- I don't know if that will ever happen (maintenance and commenting
can become a pretty majo
Meg McRoberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I do like mm's .ne functionality -- this allows the writer to specify
> that the next lines need to stay together on a page -- it might force
> a page break if there isn't enough space left on the page, but it won't
> force a page break if there is room. But .
Zvezdan Petkovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If doclifter handles all these cases as well as you already described
> there is no need for an exception to man format.
It's going to be Werner's decision, ultimately.
--
http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond
___
The point here is on "my" in the sentence above.
What Mr. Ritter is saying all this time is that the number of cases
simply does not warrant the _unportable_ change to a well established
legacy format.
If doclifter handles all these cases as well as you already described
there is no need for an ex
Personally, I would prefer having .nf/.in/.fi used in man pages
over .DS/.DE -- the display macros hold the contents on a single
page and when writing man pages that might be rendered in plain text,
PDF/PS, or HTML, I'm not crazy about this model.
I am only a writer who has written a lot of docs u
Gunnar Ritter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > It shows me that in my corpus, DS is in
> > these 21 files:
>
> Okay, so this effectively means that two people assume .DS
> exists, a Mutt and a FreeRADIUS documentation author. So I
> would not assume that it had been part of a variant of -man
> before.
Yo
Gunnar Ritter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I have been translating it as an
> > unfilled block, with a tag -- that's what the examples
> > in my corpus seem to want, and the meaning it has in mm. It differs
> > from .EX/.EE only in that it doesn't force the font to CW.
>
> Then I do not understand w
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have since written a little tool called 'mangrep' that recurses
> zgrep -l over the manual tree.
Heirloom Toolchest grep -rz :-)
> It shows me that in my corpus, DS is in
> these 21 files:
Okay, so this effectively means that two people assume .D
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > An examination of the CSRG archives shows that .Ds had been
> > defined in -mdoc as a "filled block display" in 4.3BSD-Reno,
> > but was deleted with 4.4BSD.
> >
> > Which DocBook tag should correspond to .DS?
>
> A *filled* block display?
Not rea
Gunnar Ritter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I'm not sure where .DS/.DE
> > came from, but considering the relatively large number of uses without
> > local definition I'm sure it must be historical somewhere.
>
> Can you say in which pages you discovered them? I find much
> fewer examples for .DS, with
"Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3. These macros are already present in at least some legacy Unixes.
> Notably, .EX/.EE is in Ultrix/OSF-1.
Yes, and I see it is actually used in many Tru64 manual
pages; since I want to be able to display such system pages
with Heirloom nroff, I shou
Clarke Echols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> .TP 3 \" set bullet offset
> \(bu \" or other character such as dash or square
I'm pretty sure doclifter will turn this into a DocBook bulleted list,
but I don't have any examples handy to test it on.
> Until this discussion, I had never see .EX/.EE and .DS
Meg McRoberts wrote:
What else?
Personally, what I really miss in the -man macros are the list macros from
mm -- .VL, BL, .DL, et cetera. .IP and .TP do work but are a bit awkward.
I've not been able to get the old kludge for bullet lists to work:
.IP "\(bu" 4
I don't understand the need
Meg McRoberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Personally, what I really miss in the -man macros are the list macros from
> mm -- .VL, BL, .DL, et cetera.
I sympathsize, but that is an extension that would create more severe
compatibility problems. Given that, as you say,
> .
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> To summarize:
>
> . .EX/.EE and .DS/.DE should be added to the man macros.
>
> . .SY and .OP together with .TQ (as the `standard' extension to .TP)
> should be used within man pages, but its definitions should be
> copied to the limbo of each man
> To summarize:
>
> . .EX/.EE and .DS/.DE should be added to the man macros.
>
> . .SY and .OP together with .TQ (as the `standard' extension to .TP)
> should be used within man pages, but its definitions should be
> copied to the limbo of each man page since we can't assume that
>
> Yes, normally I would be a stickler for backwards-compatibility to
> legacy Unixes. However, I feel that in the particular case of
> .EX/.EE and .DS/.DE there are several factors which, taken together,
> would make the slight degree of breakage involved an acceptable
> trade-off. [...]
To sum
40 matches
Mail list logo
