On Thu Jul 7 13:36:36 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1) Currently on a Linux system you find man pages in the following encodings: ... > and none of them contains an encoding marker. > > The agreement was to recognize the encoding according to a note in the > first line > '\" -*- coding: EUC-JP -*-
Who made this agreement? I'm a mere groff user, while you seem to arrive from a Linux manpage i18n project. Is that the group that reached the agreement? > groff will then emit errors when it is fed input that is non-ASCII and > without coding: marker, so that man page maintainers are notified that > they need to add the coding: marker. I'm sure Werner will remind you again if needed, but remember that - groff isn't just a man page preprocessor. - groff isn't tied to Linux in particular -- it's rather the other way around since there are AFAIK no other free troff implementations. - This kind of change needs to be thought through carefully. Dreaking existing documents is something that might anger a lot of people. The user who sees a new groff fail on an old document is not always in a position to modify it, and the author may not be in a position to reach all her readers with updated versions. I think there is a significant distinction between documents and software. Software tends to be alive, maintained and under update (or you don't use it). Documents tends to reach a final version, be frozen and released to the public, with work on them abandoned. For what it's worth, I tend to use an ASCII input encoding when I write man pages (writing my name as "J\(:orgen" and so on), but for longer documents written in Swedish, I simply rely on Latin-1. BR, Jörgen (speaking for myself only, and aiming to be constructive) -- // Jörgen Grahn "Koka lopplummer, bada Ross, loppor borta." \X/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Jonas _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
