Re: [Groff] Re: Bug in mm macro package

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > I don't see how this is related to the concept of accessing a font
> > position directly.  \f[B] does the same, doesn't it?
> 
> It does now, but in 1989-1993 there was no .fam request, and it was
> much easier to use .fp instead of \f(NB or some such thing in a
> macro file, having to change it throughout the package.

OK.

> Then there was the other problem of others who would specify \fB or
> \fR in the regular text instead of using macros, which caused troff
> to substitute Times Roman instead of New Century Schoolbook, etc.
> Requiring the use of \f3 instead forced them to think about what
> they were doing, rather than non-chalantly typing \fB and changing
> the font to something non-standard for the book.

I see.  Well, with groff's `.ftr' request to translate fonts this
argument no longer holds.

> When I inherited the HP-UX reference and man pages
> in 1989, it was a mish-mash of \fR, \fB, .BI and a bunch of
> other AT&T-isms.

Well, this is bad, of course.  Whatever is used, it should be
consistent.

> The newer method of using .fam may be more current, but .fp is
> still valid for those who might prefer that approach, and should
> be maintained in groff in order to be compatible with troff.

Returning to the very problem, the mm macros as contributed to groff
use `R', `I', `B', and `BI' exclusively.  Font changes should be done
with .fam or .ftr.

> Besides, it's easier to type \f1, \f2, \f3, and \f4 than to type
> \f[R] \f[I], \f[B], etc. (I don't have to go looking for the "[" and
> "]" keys every time I need them.) :-) Then there's the problem that
> some of us "old dogs" don't particularly want to have to learn new
> tricks, even when we ought to. :-)

I still don't know what to do. :-(


    Werner