Groff documentation section 5.1.9 Input Encodings <https://www.gnu.org/software/groff/manual/groff.html#Input-Encodings> contains this paragraph:
> Because a Euro glyph was not historically defined in PostScript fonts, > groff comes with a font called freeeuro.pfa that provides the Euro in > several styles. Standard PostScript fonts contain the glyphs from Latin-5 > and Latin-9 that Latin-1 lacks, so these encodings are supported for the > ps and pdf output devices as groff ships, while Latin-2 is not. That seems a little ambiguous. I'm not actually sure if I understand what the author really meant by "while Latin-2 is not [supported]". Did they mean to say only Latin-2 really needs that freeeuro.pfa anymore for lack of support in standard PS fonts? Did they mean the exact opposite, i.e. Latin-2 won't work with that font but the others will? Did they mean PS/PDF output is completely broken for Latin-2? It's a little unclear given the context and given the way that is put. Also, the author's intent with the "as groff ships" clause could be clearer. No diff, as I'm really not quite sure what that *should* say. Ian
