Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I further believe that the `.mso' request should *not* be involved in > > > encoding conversion issues. > > > > sounds like an excellent idea - my only slight worry is that `.mso' > > is treated differently to `.so' as it would force `.mso' to be only > > used to include macros rather than text. Just wondering what happens > > if text needs to be encoded within something.tmac ? > > Remember that .mso isn't handled by soelim at all. On the other > hand,
Hi Werner, ahh yes I had forgotten this, thus my reservation is now redundant.. > there shouldn't be a great problem to convert a file to be included > with a call to .mso in advance. true, Gaius _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
