On 9/17/14, Tadziu Hoffmann <hoffm...@usm.uni-muenchen.de> wrote: > I think you're using the diversion wrong.
This is, admittedly, an artificial example cooked up to illustrate the behavior. This is clearly a situation where a diversion, or even a macro, would be unnecessary at all. The question I'm posing is whether a user who uses a diversion in this "wrong" (or, let's say, less than optimal) manner should see output that is so clearly not what was intended, or whether the software should do something intelligent with the user's suboptimal input, producing output that is probably what the user wanted. Modern software tends to choose the latter route. Groff is not modern software. But should it make some concessions to the fact that it's still around in 2014?
