Re: Proposed v2: an eqn keyword change: gfont -> gifont

[G. Branden Robinson]

At 2023-04-11T14:37:51+0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> I see groff's documentation has Roman numerals but roman fonts.

Yes, that's a long-standing practice I haven't yet seen fit to deviate
from.  ;-)

3af475486f doc/groff.texinfo (Werner LEMBERG      2001-03-23 23:07:51 +0000   
454) @c Note: We say `Roman numerals' but `roman font'.

> >   Fonts
> >     eqn uses up to three typefaces to set an equation: an italic
> >     face for letters, a roman face for everything else, and a bold
> >     face.
> 
> If the Roman face is for everything else then it seems odd at this
> point that bold is needed.

I had similar thoughts, which is why I had the sentence about bold being
usable to mark matrices and vectors, which Doug found condescending.
Possibly, migrating your actively voiced suggestion from later in the
mail here and recasting a little will solve both problems.

[namely]
> >     The bold font is used by the bold primitive.
> 
>     The bold primitive uses the bold font.

> It's only at the end that everything else is probably seen to be
> ‘digits’.
> 
>     eqn uses three typefaces to set an equation: italic, Roman, and bold.
>     Set them to a groff font style with primitives gifont, grfont, and gbfont.
>     The defaults are I, R, and B in the current font family.
>     The chartype primitive sets a character's type, see above.
>     A letter character is set in italics.
>     A digit character in Roman.
>     The bold font is used by the bold primitive.

I'll marinate on this for a bit.  Thanks!

Just about anything one does with "old" groff documentation tugs on a
loose thread.  If I were a frequent Emacs user, I'd exhaust the stack
with all the recursive edits I undertook.

Regards,
Branden

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature