[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Groff] inconsistency between .R and \*R in man.tmac

From: Ralph Corderoy
Subject: Re: [Groff] inconsistency between .R and \*R in man.tmac
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:52:48 +0000


Clarke wrote:
> AT&T Unix never had a .R macro defined that I ever saw...  Certainly
> not in the man macros.

OK, I've checked up, and 7th Ed. didn't have .R but did have \*R.

Tadziu wrote:
> > .BR \-map ,
> > .R \-magic
> > and/or the various
> > .I double dash
> > options given below.
> If I read this correctly, the ".R" should have been a ".B" anyway.

Yep, that's true.  I've mailed the package maintainer.

> On the "roman" vs. "registered" issue, I nevertheless think it is
> better to have a "roman" for reasons of consistency than a
> "registered" (despite the latter being the AT&T way, and me thus
> screwing up the existing manpages).

It seems clear `registered' is the Bell Labs/System V way, but what
initially invented the other interpretation that you'd prefer to keep?

> Otherwise I'd feel pressured to analogously implement a "copyright",
> and I'd much rather have the ".C" reserved for a "computer" font like
> in the HP manpage macros.

It seems that scraping .R and keeping \*R is what would be compatible
with the man pages out there.



reply via email to

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