Re: [groff] 13/14: groff(1) (Synopsis, Options): Fix style nits.

[G. Branden Robinson]

Hi, Dave!

At 2021-06-05T19:38:50-0500, Dave Kemper wrote:
> >    * Drop notice of unsafe mode as "old" behavior; it's over 20
> >    years old.
> 
> I wonder if "old" here was intended to contrast with AT&T troff
> behavior, which was to always run in what groff considers unsafe mode
> (in that it had no such distinction).

Possibly.

> Safer mode being a groff innovation does not seem well documented
> elsewhere: the Texinfo manual doesn't mention it, and groff_diff(7)
> covers only input and output differences, not invocation differences.
> (groff_diff(7) mentions the \n[.U] register but nothing else regarding
> this mode.)  So I wonder if it's worth keeping the distinction here,
> though perhaps terming it "historical" or "traditional" rather than
> "old" behavior.

I think that's a good idea but I think I'd prefer to document it in
troff(1) instead of groff(1).  Firstly, groff(1) attempts to document
options recognized by troff only minimally, and secondly, those
accustomed to traditional *roff behavior are, I would think, a lot more
likely to be looking at troff(1) than groff(1) in the first place.

Regards,
Branden

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature