Re: [Groff] Why is it...

[Jeff Zhang]

On Dec 15, 2007 1:25 AM, Michael Kerpan <address@hidden> wrote:

> ...that groff/troff seems to be written off by so many as "obsolete"
> and "only useful for man pages", despite the fact that it can do
> everything that TeX/LaTeX (seemingly the favored non-WYSIWYG document
> processor) can do but while taking up 3 megabytes (as opposed to the
> 300 or so used by the average TeX install) It can't be ease of use, as
> *roff plus -me, -mm or -ms is no harder to use than LaTeX or HTML. It
> can't be availability as the *roff family is basically a required
> component of any Unix-like system. It can't even be font support,
> given that it's MUCH easier to install and use random PostScript fonts
> in groff than in TeX... What gives and how can we fix it?
>
> at least, groff/troff without CTAN like things and the proper ability to
handle CJK characters through latex-cjk or xetex methods in latex.