[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX
From: |
Peter Schaffter |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX |
Date: |
Thu, 3 May 2012 13:57:27 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Thu, May 03, 2012, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
> > I think esr is emphasizing (!) that in a structural-markup
> > language the tags can have no typographic meaning whatsoever.
>
> Correct. What Anton was considering unfair is the implication
> that troff only does presentational markup
Which is patently untrue. Using mom macros and HTML as an example:
.HEAD "Foo <h1>Foo</h1>
.PP <p>
Lorem ipsum... Lorem ipsum...
.SUBHEAD "Bar <h2>Bar</h2>
.PP <p>
Lorem ipsum... Lorem ipsum...
.LIST <ul>
.ITEM <li>
Item one Item one</li>
.ITEM <li>
Item two Item two</li>
.LIST off </ul>
.SUBSUBHEAD "Baz" <h3>Baz</h3>
.PP <p>
Lorem ipsum... Lorem ipsum...
> I think the idea is to stop thinking of troff and TeX as
> presentation-markup languages. They're more universal.
Indeed, and therein lies their usefulness: superb typographic
control when you need it, and clear structural markup when that's
what's called for.
--
Peter Schaffter
Author of The Binbrook Caucus
http://www.schaffter.ca
- [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Anton Shepelev, 2012/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Eric S. Raymond, 2012/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Meg McRoberts, 2012/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Clarke Echols, 2012/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Meg McRoberts, 2012/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Clarke Echols, 2012/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Steve Izma, 2012/05/05
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, James K. Lowden, 2012/05/07