Pavel Roskin wrote:
Hi, Peter! mc.sgml is not a bad idea if used consistently (i.e. the manuals are removed from CVS) and doesn't require patches to obsolete SGML tools, as
I agree, but I complain against FAQ in HTML.
the old version did. Maybe XML is better.
May be, but XML requires additional tools and knowledge.
Don't blame nroff. mm package has 7 levels (.H1-.H7), and as rule it is possible to do all what you need in nroff + mm.nroff format is obsolete and inconvenient. It doesn't even support third-level headings (after .SH and .SS), and they are needed. It requires non-obvious tricks to highlight words before dots and commas.
BTW, "File associations" is more right name for "Extension File".
--
Regards,
Andrew V. Samoilov
_______________________________________________
Mc mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc
