Larry and Werner,
thanks for spending your time to improve hdtbl. It's a good idea to
seperate hdtbl- and example stuff into hdmisc.tmac respectively
common.roff. But some little things now seem to be wrong.
1) In fonts_x.in und fonts_n.in:
.so examples/common.roff
is missing.
2) I would re
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Actually, to "groff_hdtbl.man" to include details about what needs
to be initialized before creating tables.
Thanks! However, documentation of the `pv' macro is still missing.
Honestly, I'm not really happy about pv's strange calling sequence to
use it for initializatio
On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 02:08:47PM -0500, Larry Kollar wrote:
> :
> This actually brings up something that has been bugging me for a while,
> and I think deserves its own thread: we should come up with some
> namespace guidelines for macro packages, especially for internal-use
> macros, to
> thanks for spending your time to improve hdtbl. It's a good idea to
> separate hdtbl- and example stuff into hdmisc.tmac respectively
> common.roff. But some little things now seem to be wrong. [...]
I leave this to Larry :-)
> And in groff_hdtbl.man should be described only hdtbl specific
>
> we should come up with some namespace guidelines for macro packages,
> especially for internal-use macros, to prevent conflicts. Whatever
> we agree on could go in the texinfo document.
Yeah. I'm open to any suggestions :-)
Werner
On 04/02/10 06:08:47, Larry Kollar wrote:
> This actually brings up something that has been bugging me for a
> while, and I think deserves its own thread: we should come up with
> some namespace guidelines for macro packages, especially for
> internal-use macros, to prevent conflicts. Whatever
Hello:
I've been experimenting with the -Thtml macro package which employs
www.tmac.
In trying to get "IMG" and "PIMG" to function, I noted that the macro
definitions seemed to have the arguments confused when interpreting the
width and height arguments. As well, the IMG macro appears to be look
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 09:43:40AM +1100, Robert Thorsby wrote:
> On 04/02/10 06:08:47, Larry Kollar wrote:
> > This actually brings up something that has been bugging me for a
> > while, and I think deserves its own thread: we should come up with
> > some namespace guidelines for macro package
