Re: [groff] [UTROFF] conclusion

[Peter Schaffter]

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017, Pierre-Jean wrote:
> 2) With some hacks if not out of the box, Mom probably works well
> enough on Neatroff to take advantage of its features.

I suspect not.  I haven't got the time to look into it, but if
anyone wants to test mom with Neatroof, it could be instructive.

> 3) If you want to compare macros for typographic purpose only, I
> would advise you to look at the vertical alignment, ie, headings
> should not break the vertical grid.  I know that Utmac takes care
> of it (if the alignment is broken, it is a bug), I don't know
> for Mom, but since Peter Schafter has a taste for typography, I
> believe he did take care about that too.

Indeed.  Unless flex-spacing is enabled, mom is bloody-minded
about sticking to the grid.  With flex-spacing, it's not an issue.
Feathered, or carded, leading ("adjusted document leading," in
mom-speak) ensures that "pure text" pages end at exactly the same
spot as pages with headings/images/pre-processor material/etc
regardless of whether the intervening text strays off the grid.

-- 
Peter Schaffter
http://www.schaffter.ca