[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX |
Date: |
Wed, 09 May 2012 08:54:30 +0200 (CEST) |
>> > groff to XML to HTML via doclifter produces better HTML than any of
>> > the direct groff -> HTML tools.
>>
>> Sadly, this is true. grohtml would need a big hug with much love to
>> grow up, but currently nobody really takes care of it.
>
> The problem is fundamental - a good conversion needs structural
> analysis as good as doclifter's, which is *hard*.
Yes. However, grohtml would be able to do different things, in a
different way, and with proper markup the results could be excellent
also. Sigh.
Werner
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, (continued)
Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, James K. Lowden, 2012/05/03
Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Larry Kollar, 2012/05/08
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Peter Schaffter, 2012/05/09
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Eric S. Raymond, 2012/05/09
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/05/09
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Eric S. Raymond, 2012/05/09
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX,
Werner LEMBERG <=
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, James K. Lowden, 2012/05/09
- Re: [Groff] Eric Raymond on groff and TeX, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/05/10