Re: par*vs in ms-macros, and \snn in troff

[Murray Adelman]

   > X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3 [p0] on Linux
   > X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
   > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
   > MIME-Version: 1.0
   > Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 14:30:48 -0000 (GMT)
   > Reply-To: address@hidden
   > From: (Ted Harding) <address@hidden>
   > Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
   > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
   > Content-Length: 1306
   > 
   > On 13-Nov-00 Werner LEMBERG wrote:
   > > A looong time ago you've written:
   > > 
   > > From: Murray Adelman <address@hidden>
   > > Subject: Re: par*vs in ms-macros, and \snn in troff
   > > Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:38:23 +1100 (EST)
   > > 
   > >>    > > > A construct like \s40 (or \sxy where x > 3) is interpreted
   > >>    > > > as \s4 (or \sx) followed by the character '0' (or the
   > >>    > > > character 'y'), and not as a request for a point size of 40
   > >>    > > > points (or xy points).  A construct like \s39 is
   > >>    > > > interpreted as a request for 39 points.
   > > 
   > > Conclusion: I won't change anything :-)  Maybe this should be
   > > mentioned in the FAQ...
   > 
   > I have to admit (after having been part of the proposals for change
   > "a looong time ago") that in practice I use the groff (but not traditional
   > troff) syntax \s[xy] etc when I want a uniform syntax for point sizes.
   > 
   > That way \s[4], \s[40], \s[400] even all work smoothly, and it is one
   > less wierd quirk to remember.
   > 
   > So I'm equally happy to leave things as they are.

Me to.  I never use large fonts anyway and I just thought I would make
a suggestion to followup the original problem.

                Murray