[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Groff] behaviour of \fP

From: Ted Harding
Subject: RE: [Groff] behaviour of \fP
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 04:09:36 -0000 (GMT)

On 21-Jan-00 Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> Consider the following with the ascii device, using
> This is
> .B bold
> text.
> And this is \fCtypewriter\fP text.
> As you can see, the last `text.' appears in bold face, which is of
> course unwanted.
> Question: Shall we change the behaviour of `remembering the previous
> font'?  I can imagine the following:
>   If a font is selected which doesn't exist for the current device,
>   ignore it but update the `previous font' so that \fP gives a
>   reasonable result.
> What's the behaviour with the original troff?  Do you think that this
> change would cause a lot of inconsistencies?

I don't know how "original troff" behaves in this respect. However,
I believe that groff should do the decent thing in these circumstances.
If absence of font 'C' means that there's no font change, than
\fP should be ignored as well. If I understand Werner's proposal
correctly, this would be achieved by "copying" the current font
to the previous font if the font change request fails.

This would (or should) make the phenomenon device-independent:
following \fP, the text would be in the intended font whether
or not a preceding \f[anything] failed because the requested font did
not exist (which you have to accept anyway).

I've tried to think of circumstances in which Werner's suggestion
would do something unwanted, but haven't seen anything so far.


E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <address@hidden>
Date: 24-Jan-00                                       Time: 04:09:35
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]