Re: [Groff] inconsistent synopsis for .MAILTO

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi Werner,

> Overloading *might* work.  More important is consistency -- if I have
> a line-oriented macro foo, it's easy to remember that, say, <foo and
> foo> start and end the block-oriented versions.

As an aside, I'd vote against the < and > characters personally.  A S
and E suffix as in PS/PE, TS/TE, etc., would be fine.  <> just look
wrong in a troff macro name.

Cheers,


Ralph.