Follow-up Comment #14, bug #63768 (project groff): [comment #13 comment #13:] > I wouldn't say "adamant"...but pretty resolved on letting groff > 1.23.0 gather some feedback on the feature.
Do you mean feedback on the 'an*MR-URL-format' register? What if you end up having to ditch it? It strikes me as poor form to introduce a feature in a major release (1.23.0), only to axe it in (1.23.1). (Of course, I'm probably reading too far into this…) > A. Can you clarify that both Terminal.app and iTerm support the second one? You recently gained SSH access to a macOS machine, yes? If so, you should be able to test this yourself: $ open x-man-page://3/printf $ screencapture -mxT3 ~/Desktop/screengrab.png On Darwin, the open(1) command is the moral equivalent of xdg-open(1), and treats URIs with semantics similar to `xdg-mime query x-scheme-handler/…` (I think; I don't have a Linux machine handy to double-check this myself). $ uri="mailto:[email protected]&subject=Let%27s+go+Branden!"; $ open "$uri" # macOS $ xdg-open "$uri" # Actual POSIX systems Your confusion with the "x-man-page" scheme likely stems from the fact that macOS's default handler for that protocol is Terminal.app (which opens man(1)'s output in a new window, irrespective of whether the Terminal.app's running or not). Hence, iTerm2 will open those links in Terminal.app by default (changing that is an exercise for the macOS user, and irrelevant to this discussion). > B. That last one--in email you documented it as "x-man-doc://1/groff(1)" (ManOpen), complete with the redundant parenthesized suffix. Which is correct? That was a typo. The "x-man-doc" scheme was used by antique versions of ManOpen before Apple introduced the "x-man-page" scheme in 2005. Afterward, ManOpen supported both schemes, with the older one kept for compatibility and flexibility. > The macro package defines it unconditionally anyway, so I don't see why that's necessary. Not so much "necessary" as it is plain old defensive programming: if a macro unsets that register—deliberately or otherwise—it shouldn't cause man(7) to generate mangled and/or useless hyperlinks. > It seems useful to let a value of 0 mean "I don't know what the F you're talking about", which will be true of other implementations, particularly since the zero-interpolation-for-undefined-registers language rule suggests it. Erh, won't other implementations have a `an-url` string (or whatever) defined as well? > I would love for Apple's terminal emulators to support "man:page(section)". I would then happily rip this feature out entirely and never miss it. There's probably a way to add support for it from C++/Objective-C, but that would require knowledge and access to Xcode, Apple's SDKs, and access to a proper workstation. I have all but the knowledge (I haven't touched Xcode in 12 years), and I'm not sure RMS would be pleased with a FSF project housing code that requires a heavily, *heavily* commercial IDE to build… _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63768> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
