Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-16 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi Alejandro, Alejandro Colomar wrote on Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 01:59:24PM +0200: > On 8/14/22 21:43, DJ Chase wrote: >> Do you think that a descriptive/trailing standard could be beneficial >> or would you still say that it could mostly hinder *roff >> implementations? When prepared with

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-15 Thread Alejandro Colomar
Hi, On 8/14/22 21:43, DJ Chase wrote: True; prescriptive standards can certainly make some things worse. As a further example, ISO 8601 sucks. I mean, its core specification is great, but there are so many different ways that are allowed that the full standard is almost completely unparseable.

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread Sam Varshavchik
Ingo Schwarze writes: Hi, DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +: > Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard? No, i think that would be pure madness given the amount of working time available in any of the roff projects. I expect the amount of effort required to be

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread DJ Chase
On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 6:35 PM EDT, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > At 2022-08-14T14:49:10+, DJ Chase wrote: > > On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 9:56 AM EDT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > > DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +: > > > > > > > Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard?

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread G. Branden Robinson
At 2022-08-14T14:49:10+, DJ Chase wrote: > On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 9:56 AM EDT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +: > > > > > Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard? > > > > No, i think that would be pure madness given the amount of

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread DJ Chase
On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 12:32 PM EDT, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > On 8/14/22 16:49, DJ Chase wrote: > > On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 9:56 AM EDT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > >> You appear to massively overrate the importance end-users > >> typically attribute to standardization. > > > > That’s probably

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread Alejandro Colomar
Hi, On 8/14/22 16:49, DJ Chase wrote: On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 9:56 AM EDT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: Hi, DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +: Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard? No, i think that would be pure madness given the amount of working time available

Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread DJ Chase
On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 9:56 AM EDT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi, > > DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +: > > > Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard? > > No, i think that would be pure madness given the amount of working > time available in any of the roff projects. >

Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support)

2022-08-14 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi, DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +: > Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard? No, i think that would be pure madness given the amount of working time available in any of the roff projects. I expect the amount of effort required to be significantly larger than