[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Readability of troff documents (Was: [Groff] Bug in gxditview)

From: Larry Kollar
Subject: Re: Readability of troff documents (Was: [Groff] Bug in gxditview)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 23:18:50 -0400

Troff is hard to read since ages but it may be better to read when wisely formatted. I personally take the sed-way not only for \(em but also for ligatures like \(fl and stuff. So it won't bother me and I'd prefer to let it alone.

It's really not that hard to read, once you've become familiar with it. Having a syntax-highlighting text editor certainly helps, too. Even better, it's easy to *write* -- the short tags let you add them without the mental pause needed to type something like "itemize" when a simple .BL will do.

Last, would you really tell that a non computer person nowadays uses troff in any way? These even avoid LaTeX either (to my knowledge) and use their favourite GUI and mouse appliction to create their docs.

There are a slew of free XML document processors under development; one or more of them will certainly get off the ground. Groff would make an excellent print engine for an XML document.

Larry Kollar     k  o  l  l  a  r  @  a  l  l  t  e  l  .  n  e  t
Unix Text Processing: "UTP Revival" (note new URL)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]