Re: [Groff] Werner's Margin Notes

[Tadziu Hoffmann]

> There are a couple of routines in the mom macro set that would
> have caused me a lot less grief if it existed, but I've
> kludged my way around its absence, and things work as they
> should, so, as you point out, it isn't really an issue.

If I were a TeX advocate, I would claim you're thinking of
typesetting in terms of inappropriate concepts :-)
However, we all realize that much of *roff is somewhat of a
kludge, and I think most of us have arranged ourselves quite
comfortably with that idea...


> I rather suspect that my even seeing the possible need for
> such a thing comes from the fact that it existed in all the
> old-style dedicated phototypesetting systems (CompuGraphic,
> Quadritek, Linotronic, AM, etc) on which I learned and
> practised my trade.  My thinking has been conditioned by that,
> I suspect.

Now I'm intrigued.  I would have supposed "old-style" typesetters
to be based on ideas borrowed from traditional metal type, and I
can't see how the idea of a carriage return would be applicable
there.  (I thought only typewriters had carriages.)  So exactly
how did these dedicated phototypesetting systems treat the
aforementioned issues of extra line space, and did these systems
perhaps employ other concepts which might be useful for groff?
(After all, most of us usually don't generate new ideas, but only
apply those to which we have been previously exposed.)