[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info
From: |
T. Kurt Bond |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info |
Date: |
Sun, 4 Nov 2001 12:30:38 -0500 (EST) |
Werner LEMBERG writes:
> Usually, the DocBook file is used to create various output formats, so
> it is not unlikely that someone produces troff output from DocBook.
> And that is perverse IMHO.
Why? DocBook is a structural markup language for documentation; it
does *not* specify the appearance of a document. Troff is a
typesetting language; it is all about specifying the appearance of a
document. Why would it be perverse to transform from structural
markup into a typesetting language for output?
It works well in practice. I transform SDocBook documents into
groff regularly.
--
T. Kurt Bond, address@hidden
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, (continued)
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Bernd Warken, 2001/11/01
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/11/01
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Bernd Warken, 2001/11/02
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/11/03
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info,
T. Kurt Bond <=
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/11/06
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, T. Kurt Bond, 2001/11/07
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Bernd Warken, 2001/11/07
- Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/11/01
Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/11/01
Re: [Groff] troff(1) and info, Werner LEMBERG, 2001/11/01