Re: Groff macro to make .UR and .UE links clickable in PDF?

[Jan Stary]

> While I agree that a shorter line length is more readable, I frequently
> exit a manpage, maximise the terminal window, then reopen it when my
> goal is to quickly scan the page for a relevant option.

I don't get it: how does a wider text window help you find an option?

> I find argument lists in particular much easier to look through
> when they take up fewer lines.

Ah, you mean

        -a Some option that takes up more lines when
           the terminal is narrow, but only makes one line
           in a wide termminal

        -b Another such option occupying less lines
           when the manpage formatter follows the
           terminal width

becoming

        -a Some option that takes up more lines when the terminal is narrow, 
but only makes one line in a wide termminal
        -b Another such option occupying less lines when the manpage formatter 
follows the terminal width

so that you see the -a and -b in front of successive lines
when the lines are stretched to a large widtgh?

Personaly, I hate it when a manpage formatter does that.

(Some formatters make looking for e.g. the -s of ls(1) trivial:
"man -O tag=s ls", see http://mandoc.bsd.lv/man/mandoc.1.html#tag)

> Manpages in particular are less likely to have large paragraphs
> of text, and a long line length commonly reduces an entire topic to a
> single line which I also find more convenient.

This is probably a matter of personal taste.
I find it exhausting to read very long lines.

> You have a point in that scanning for info is not reading, and
> therefore doesn't require the same kind of concentration and
> doesn't result in as much fatigue. I'm arguing about the
> difficulty in trying to read and comprehend all of a text when
> the typography makes the eye work harder. So perhaps the default
> should be related to the most common way of using man pages.

Please.

        Jan