Re: <OK> [Groff] Simplifying groff documentation

[Werner LEMBERG]

> As a troff user, my preference would actually be to have a
> collection of XSLT stylesheets, one for each of the supported XML
> input languages, and to have a common troff macro set to which all
> of these are transformed.

This sounds good.

> For doing anything which is not representable in the input
> language, one could use <?troff .xx?>.

Yep.

> For some uses, the generated troff code could also be edited
> directly instead of the source document.  This is what I already do
> with my OpenDocument-to-troff converter - no sane person would want
> to edit OpenDocument manually in order to create a book.

Hmm.  Here I disagree.  Working on intermediate files is not fun.
Instead, I strongly prefer the tagging within the source code as
described above.

On the other side I must admit that I have never done this, so I speak
from a theoretical point of view.  Maybe it's not possible to foresee
what the converter exactly does (which I hope not), and tagging of the
intermediate file is really necessary.  However, this should be
reduced to the absolute minimum.


    Werner