Update of bug #67791 (group groff):
Status: None => In Progress
Assigned to: None => gbranden
_______________________________________________________
Follow-up Comment #1:
Hi Alexis,
[comment #0 original submission:]
> The following issue was
> [https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2025-12/msg00017.html originally
> reported to the groff mailing list] and this bug report then submitted as
> suggested in [https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2025-12/msg00036.html
> one of the replies]:
>
> When preparing a document for the pdf device (and possibly other typesetting
> devices) using the mm macros the rule (line) above the organisational
> affiliation can appear dashed when using the T (default) and H font family.
> With other font families (e.g. A, C, BM) the line appears solid.
I agree that the rule should appear solid. See page 60 (of 80) in the DWB 3.3
_mm_ manual.
https://tkurtbond.github.io/troff/mm-all.pdf
When updating _groff mm_'s memorandum support during the 1.24 development
cycle, I deliberately deviated from DWB's practice of overdrawing the right
margin with this rule. Just FYI.
In
[https://cgit.git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/commit/?id=ace17af9469d6ee0f91f857801633c22854e305f
commit ace17af9469], I deliberately chose to draw the rule with the `\[em]`
glyph because that exists on terminals, whereas the default for drawing
horizontal rules, `\[ru]`, the baseline rule, has no Unicode code point and
that is unrepresentable on UTF-8 terminals. (Unfortunately, the idiomatic em
dash's vertical position also differs from that of any baseline rule.)
> According to [https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2025-12/msg00018.html
> another reply on the mailing list] the _"reason […] a dashed line with the
> T and H fonts [is used,] is because these two families are part of the
> base-14 fonts which do not need to be embedded in the pdf. [And it is] the
> duty of the pdf viewer to supply its own version of those fonts"_ which may
> render the em character differently that groff's native fonts.
>
> Looking at m.tmac the line is drawn using the `\[em]` character and I wonder
> whether the line would better be drawn using the default line character when
> in troff mode to ensure it is always a solid regardless of the active font
> family.
Yes, that's a good idea.
> Please find attached a patch, a minimal working example (mwe), and two PDF
> documents demonstrating the mwe output before and after the patch was
> applied.
Thanks!
I expect to use a Git authorial credit of
"Alexis (surryhill)" <[email protected]>
in the commit. Please advise ASAP if that's not what you want.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67791>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
