Re: [Groff] Why is it...

[Blake McBride]

Peter Schaffter wrote:
> I agree that the classical macro packages belong to another age,
> and that that's off-putting for many people (hence the mom
> package).  Not so sure I agree it's "the big thing".  I suspect
> rather it's a mindset problem.  Experienced *roffers are, by
> nature, tinkerers.  They expect to get their hands dirty when they
> encounter a situation not covered by their preferred macroset.
>
> Typical scenario:
>
>     You want sectioning?  Okay--here's the macro set that sort of
>     does what you want.  Now all you have to do is modify this macro
>     here, and that macro there, and write these new ones...
>
> They/we expect to (and can) roll our own solutions to many
> things, with the result that a monolithic macroset to cover every
> possibility has never really been part of *roff thinking, which it
> would have to be for *roff to gain widespread acceptance.
>
>   
(Being a thinker) I don't think I agree here.  There are always people, 
with any system, that like to get under the hood and tinker.  I am 
surely one of them.  But, and this is a big but, in the end I want 
something that serves the function I seek.  At the time I want to 
compose a document I don't want to tinker with anything.  I want to get 
the document out and get on with my next responsibility.  The LaTeX 
package is far from perfect but it has proven far more useful than 
anything else (for the non-WYSIWYG formatters) out there.  It is pretty 
much the only thing in "The modern era".  I prefer groff!  However, a 
lot of really smart people spent a lot of time understanding typesetting 
and layout (as apposed to programming) and got it largely right.  The 
underlying programming system is the biggest spaghetti, nightmare mess 
I've ever seen but it does work.  Why don't we leverage off their 
typesetting / layout experience and just (basically) clone LaTeX with 
mom?  I actually think it would be relatively easy, and the end result 
will be much more understandable and customizable.

I'm not sure it's any mindset problem.  The default LaTeX layout is 
beautiful, and people recognize it.  Most people who use LaTeX are not 
programmers.  Your statement above implies that only a programmer can 
use groff.  Unfortunately, I agree. But it doesn't have to be this way.

Clone LaTeX with mom, write a tutorial, and package it all up, and we'll 
have a lot more people using groff/mom.  I am willing to help.  Any takers?

Blake McBride