"D. E. Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, I think that using groff to write your webpage, or as a
> front end for various document formats, is probably misdirected.
> DocBook, word processors, LaTeX (in some cases), and so on are much
> better suited to these various tasks.
I'm sure ma
Which is the *best* editor?
The one I know in I know my spine.
Which is the second best editor?
The one used by most of the folks around me,
because that means they can help me and I can help them and
deep shared knowledge is an exponential function.
OK, somehow my entire reply got deleted before I sent it (my copy in
"Sent" is also blank).
Michael Smith wanted to know if anyone ever thought about a utility
to translate XSL:FO to groff. My opinion is that it would be better
to skip the translation to FO and go straight to groff, for s
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
Meg McRoberts wrote:
I've been fiddling with OpenOffice lately.
In this context, I consider OpenOffice to be equivalent to Word
(yeah, I know, at least it's not a proprietary format and all).
And that things basically *work* in OOo.
For technical documents, I need a lot more flexibility t
On 10/20/05, Larry Kollar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> OK, somehow my entire reply got deleted before I sent it (my copy in
> "Sent" is also blank).
>
> Michael Smith wanted to know if anyone ever thought about a utility
> to translate XSL:FO to groff. My opinion is that it would be better
> to s
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 07:52:50AM -0400, M Bianchi wrote:
> Which is the *best* editor?
> The one I know in I know my spine.
Take 2:
Which is the *best* editor?
The one I know in my spine.
--
Mike who cannot proofread his own email Bianchi
__
Elloelloello :)
Tadaala-fil Softt-Taabs (winner in ED treatmennt solutions contest)
is getting even cheapeer:
Small jar - 4.19 per ddose
Medium jar - 2.49 per ddose
Large jar - 2.39 peer dose
1 YEAR of EVERYDAY pleasure - $399
http://de.geocities.com/Marrissa86725Kacey7225/
---
On Wednesday 19 October 2005 17:22, Jon Snader wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:14:28AM +0100, Keith MARSHALL wrote:
> > I've tried various editors in my time, Emacs among them. But, I
> > keep going back to vi, (or (g)vim), for personal choice.
>
> In the end, there can be only one.
>
If only
> However, I think that using groff to write your webpage, or as a
> front end for various document formats, is probably misdirected.
> DocBook, word processors, LaTeX (in some cases), and so on are much
> better suited to these various tasks.
I use groff for letters, academic papers, and class ov
Hi
I prefer sam as a editor for UNIX.
and if possible, acme.
Both came from Plan9.
May be there is someone interested in those :=)
Gabriel
2005/10/20, Zahar Malinovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wednesday 19 October 2005 17:22, Jon Snader wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:14:28AM +0100, Ke
I use groff for letters, seminar notes (transcribed from hand-
written so I can read them), and lots of other things. I keep
a few macro files around for various purposes that I have written.
I expand my seminar notes so they have additional content, then
print them for easy reading (my handwritin
Meg McRoberts wrote
>
> I prefer HTML as an output format from the same source that can also
> generate PS, PDF, formatted ASCII... It's great to get a technical
> document into HTML to display on the web but if I want a printed
> copy, the HTML doc isn't compact enough to be satisfying...
I wo
On Oct 19, 2005, at 03:28, Miklos Somogyi wrote:
Bernd, thank you very much for the idea. I'll try when I'll have X
windows.
I would like to install Tiger and the the whole X environment on my
Mac, but
I wait until I am sure that Tiger and "terminal" can co-exist.
I don't understand wh
On 20-Oct-05 Robert Marks wrote:
>> However, I think that using groff to write your webpage, or as a
>> front end for various document formats, is probably misdirected.
>> DocBook, word processors, LaTeX (in some cases), and so on are much
>> better suited to these various tasks.
>
> I use groff f
(I decided to change the subject header)
I TOTALLY agree! I'm on this list because I love groff; I
spent 20+ years writing complex technical documents with groff
and sputter constantly about trying to do this sort of writing
in Word (or Word-like) tools.
The practical problem I face is that few
Which is the *best* editor?
The one I know in I know my spine.
Or in the case of vi, my fingers. I've been known to write about Un*x
topics in a GUI text editor, start jackhammering the 'j' key, and
wonder why the cursor isn't moving down.
Is anyone collecting the "reasons for using gr
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 10:51:45PM -0600, D. E. Evans wrote:
> groff is now a major component in a majority (I would think) of
> UNIX systems, and UNIX variants. It is used for online manuals,
> and print manuals; it is used for writing documentation, memos,
> letters, and so on.
I don't agree wi
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 02:02:15AM +1000, Robert Marks wrote:
> I've been using *roff since the days of nroff and
> daisywheel printers, i.e., 1978. Am I alone?
No, Mark. I wrote my first nroff documents at Bell Labs, in 1974 or 1975, on
what were called Programmers' Workbench UNIX systems. The
> groff is now a major component in a majority (I would think) of UNIX
> systems, and UNIX variants. It is used for online manuals, and
> print manuals; it is used for writing documentation, memos, letters,
> and so on. However, I think that using groff to write your webpage,
> or as a front end
> > Have you actually looked at groff.texinfo? A pdf-Version can be
> > found at
> >
> > http://groff.ffii.org/groff/groff-1.19.2.pdf
> >
> > Comments (and patches!) to improve this are highly welcome.
>
> I'd be happy to submit patches once it's converted to roff but I
> just can't bring myself
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:34:05AM -0600, Clarke Echols wrote:
> :
> If any of you have trouble with tendonitis or carpal tunnel
> syndrome, take a look at the Kinesis keyboards. They are
> WONDERFUL!!! It takes about 3 weeks to get used to one, and
> it totally ruins you for "normal" keybo
My what talent and experience! Some real veterans hanging around
here.
All the tossing of ideas has opened some new ideas for me.
I'd like to create the equivalent of a PowerPoint presentation
using PDF or other reasonable display. It would be nice to
be able to use the entire screen instead of
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:01:24PM +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > Have you actually looked at groff.texinfo? A pdf-Version can be
> > > found at
> > >
> > > http://groff.ffii.org/groff/groff-1.19.2.pdf
> > >
> > > Comments (and patches!) to improve this are highly welcome.
> >
> > I'd be hap
On Oct 20, 2005, at 4:37 PM, Clarke Echols wrote:
I'd like to create the equivalent of a PowerPoint presentation
using PDF or other reasonable display. It would be nice to
be able to use the entire screen instead of a window, like
PowerPoint does. It has to run on Windows 98 and newer machine
Dear Clarke,
Look at my teaching overheads, at, say,
http://www.agsm.edu.au/~bobm/teaching/Taiwan/lect05-2.pdf
To get full screen viewing, save the file to disk and open with Acrobat
Reader.
If the full-screen viewing mode doesn't kick in, choose Full Screen from the
Windows menu.
This file and
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.'
___
On 19/10/2005, at 11:23 PM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
For me a much better documentation would be enough, [...]
Have you actually looked at groff.texinfo? A pdf-Version can be found
at
http://groff.ffii.org/groff/groff-1.19.2.pdf
Comments (and patches!) to improve this are highly welcome.
28 matches
Mail list logo
