> IIRC it still has problems when output goes across multiple lines
> (becomes continuous underline including margin and spacing from
> second line going forward) and with underlining punctuation after the
> argument (workarounds force an extra space). I can confirm tomorrow.
The
Copying the list as I replied to Branden only by accident a few minutes ago.
This should be the latest version of Werner's underlining macro:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2010-08/msg00017.html
IIRC it still has problems when output goes across multiple lines (becomes
conti
Hi Blake,
At 2023-01-30T08:30:57-0600, Blake McBride wrote:
> I had a problem with producing underlines a few years ago. Werner
> provided a macro (.Underline) and included it in a file named ul.tmac.
> That file seems not to be a part of groff anymore.
I don't have any record of any such file e
Greetings,
I had a problem with producing underlines a few years ago. Werner provided
a macro (.Underline) and included it in a file named ul.tmac. That file
seems not to be a part of groff anymore.
Having an old copy of that file, I tried it, and it worked perfectly.
However, I wonder if there
an here? I guess Doug was thinking
> of the difference between .ul and .cu in nroff.
Underlining yes and no is different than yes and no.
:) _yes_ _no_ <-> _yes no_
Don't know if .ul/.cu is different (not for troff maybe nroff). I
finally skipped underlining provided by groff, using li
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:21:58PM +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> > Actually, why not? I'd like to argue that request names carry with
> > them an "implied contract" as to their function, and "ul" stands for
> > underline, so that's what it should be used for.
It _does_ stand for "underline", in
Hi Tadziu,
> Actually, why not? I'd like to argue that request names carry with
> them an "implied contract" as to their function, and "ul" stands for
> underline, so that's what it should be used for.
Is it really worth the hassle of having .ul mean three things instead of
just two? Also, it s
unctuation?
>
> When part of the string or text. So one can text it on the spot.
What about descenders? It would be nice if the underline didn't have to
cross over them, but with more finesse than simply not underlining q and
p since the start of the q can be underlined and the end
rline
> but actually mean italic" was a hack already at the time
> troff was introduced, in order to make older nroff documents
> (that *did* use underlining) look prettier on the typesetter.
> If this (mis)feature is really needed for older documents,
> then that's wha
> Von: "Bernd Warken"
>
> 5) Macro:
> .\" .UNDERLINE before underlined after
> .de UNDERLINE
> . ie n \\$1\fI\\$2\fP\\$3
> . el \\$1\Z'\\$2'\v'.25m'\D'l \w'\\$2'u 0'\v'-.25m'\\$3
> ..
I now know, where I got the `troff' part `.el' from.
This macro definition is part of the `ms' macro package,
c" was a hack already at the time
troff was introduced, in order to make older nroff documents
(that *did* use underlining) look prettier on the typesetter.
If this (mis)feature is really needed for older documents,
then that's what we have compatibility mode for. I'm hoping
nobody
Hi Peter,
> Have a look at om.tmac, the macro definition '.de ul*ps'.
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/contrib/mom/om.tmac#n175
OK, so it takes the normal grops definitions, e.g.
/Q{moveto show}bind def
and replaces them with its own,
/Q { moveto X show Y } def
where X
There is another possibility for underlining by using overstriking
with \z and \(ul
# overstrike.groff
This underlines the 3 character part "tar" of the word "start":
.br
.\" ft CR
before s\
\z\[ul]t\
\z\[ul]a\
\z\[ul]r\
t after
#
This works correctly with tr
terminate together, or do they nest?
Save previous, as is the standard in groff. If it behaves like color,
it would not introduce a new logic.
> One can come up with answers to these quesions, but the first issue
> is whether this is an idea worth pursuing.
Think so.
Underlining, underlining t
Hi Carsten,
> I would have no problem with a special groff request with a new name.
> But one can't change .ul.
I'm not sure Bernd was suggesting .ul change in troff to underline.
Even if he was, it wouldn't be accepted so don't fret. :-)
Cheers, Ralph.
Sorry for this duplicate. It is arcor.de bug. It has been send yesterday 7:30
am and did not arrive after one hour, so I sended it again (yesterday morning).
Sorry for inconvenience.
- Original Nachricht
Von: Peter Schaffter
An: groff@gnu.org
Datum: 08.07.2014 05:26
Betreff: Re: [Groff] underlining
> > At least in ms macros, the ".UL" will underline whatever it is given
> > as an argument; but this does not live well with line-breaks
Hi Peter,
> I still think an underlining request should be considered for groff,
Agreed, but it should offer strike-through too. And both u̲n̲d̲e̲r̲l̲i̲n̲e̲ and
s̶t̶r̶i̶k̶e̶-t̵h̵r̵o̵u̵g̵h̵ should allow double variations, and probably triple;
double-underline is used to indicate small caps
- Original Nachricht
Von: Peter Schaffter
An: groff@gnu.org
Datum: 08.07.2014 05:26
Betreff: Re: [Groff] underlining
> > At least in ms macros, the ".UL" will underline whatever it is given
> > as an argument; but this does not live well with line-breaks
> There is no requirement, but doesn't it make sense to put it in
> an environment? As with pagination--if you have font or size
> changes in the text it is comparable to .decorate and you do
> not want to have these font changes to apply on the pagination.
Agree. It should be treated the same
- Original Nachricht
Von: Deri James
An: groff@gnu.org
Datum: 08.07.2014 18:12
Betreff: Re: [Groff] {Groff] underlining
> One wrinkle with this approach is when traps are invoked, if a particular
> decoration is in
> effect when a trap is sprung, it is unl
On Tue 08 Jul 2014 09:10:05 Doug McIlroy wrote:
> As has been pointed out, underlining by macro is at best inconvenient
> in filled text. Thus it was proposed that underline, and perhaps
> strike-through might be a groff primitive like .bd. All these capabilities
> may be understoo
- Original Nachricht
Von: Doug McIlroy
An: groff@gnu.org
Datum: 08.07.2014 15:10
Betreff: Re: [Groff] {Groff] underlining
> Maybe we need a more general facility, in terms of which a whole
> array of effects can be defined. One possibility is a primitive,
> say .d
As has been pointed out, underlining by macro is at best inconvenient
in filled text. Thus it was proposed that underline, and perhaps
strike-through might be a groff primitive like .bd. All these capabilities
may be understood as ways to decorate individual characters.
There are other
such
underlined - so .ul works there.
Unfortunately, it works only for simple cases. On ttys, underlining
over line breaks gives ugly results if there is indentation.
Werner
> The .ul macro dates back to nroff which was aimed at impact printers and
> where
> underlining was (almost) the only option and the intention was to replace
> manual typing. My first use of nroff was on daisy wheel printers; we were
> grateful for .ul .
Yes, that is true
> ... Would be a good thing but has to have a new name (other than .ul).
> Preferable with more than two characters.
The .ul macro dates back to nroff which was aimed at impact printers and where
underlining was (almost) the only option and the intention was to replace
manual typing. My
Hi Steve,
> But as far as I can tell, PostScript fonts have some sort of built-in
> ability for underlining that other layout systems seem to be able to
> implement. Do these two lines from Utopia-Regular have anything to do
> with it?:
> /UnderlinePo
Steve --
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014, Steve Izma wrote:
> But as far as I can tell, PostScript fonts have some sort of
> built-in ability for underlining that other layout systems seem
> to be able to implement. Do these two lines from Utopia-Regular
> have anything t
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014, Ted Harding wrote:
> I would not wholly agree with this!
I'm in Ted's camp on this. It's far too general a statement to say
"underlining is bad typography". In many contexts, the statement simply
isn't true. More significantly, it
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 11:11:22PM +0200, Carsten Kunze wrote:
> Subject: Re: [Groff] underlining
>
> Underlining is simply bad typography in typesetting. That's why
> italic is used. Technically it had been possible in otroff to
> underline--they did not use it for style reas
Underlining is simply bad typography in typesetting. That's why italic is used.
Technically it had been possible in otroff to underline--they did not use it
for style reasons.
I would have no problem with a special groff request with a new name. But one
can't change .ul. There are
I would not wholly agree with this! Granted, in normal running text
words would be printed in italics for emphasis (which indeed is also
a technical name). The "aliasing" of groff's underlining to italics
for printed output is of course a relic of the days (going back to
teletypes i
There is good reason for using italic font for text marked with .ul. For
typesetting underlining is very bad typography. So the current programming IS
best programming. And it is documented in really every book about UNIX troff
(did you read one?).
So create a new groff request (different name
1) I propose to add documentation for underlining in `groff.7'.
2) A long time ago, Werner Lemberg wrote an ul.tmac and publisheed it only in
this
mailing list. But I could not find this tmac file somewhere else.
3) There is a `groff' request `.ul', that just generates an ita
nly one pair of eyes.
I've implemented a workaround that seems robust, so I'm going to
suggest the letting the issue go for now.
As for Tadziu's underlining directly with postscript code, the
last posted version works like a charm. Although it proved to be
somewhat trickier t
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010, Werner Lemberg wrote:
> > Werner, I can't provide a small example to demonstrate the "blank
> > page at the end of a diversion" anomaly I posted about earlier, only
> > a big, unwieldy one. Aside from having to post several (long) mom
> > macros that are modified versions of
> Werner, I can't provide a small example to demonstrate the "blank
> page at the end of a diversion" anomaly I posted about earlier, only
> a big, unwieldy one. Aside from having to post several (long) mom
> macros that are modified versions of what's in the cvs, I'd have to
> include a refer dat
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
> > As to changing fonts while underlining, it's hard to imagine
> > a situation in which it's likely to happen. Underlining
> > should at best be an occasional effect, IMHO. Still,
> > one likes to have s
> As to changing fonts while underlining, it's hard to imagine
> a situation in which it's likely to happen. Underlining
> should at best be an occasional effect, IMHO. Still,
> one likes to have solutions that cover every possibility.
Well, for editorial purposes it'
so make it a bit more configurable (line thickness etc.).
With the supplied bit of postscript, it's easy enough to write
a macro that takes the desired thickness and distance from the
baseline as arguments.
For my purposes, the sentence space issue can be resolved by setting
the sentence spac
> The only hitch I've encountered is that if the sentence spacing is
> greater than the groff default, the underline gets broken between
> sentences.
Yes, also if you switch to, e.g., bold while in underline mode.
In fact, in anything which isn't printed with a single "show"
(or one of its varian
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010, Werner Lemberg wrote:
>
> > If you're satisfied with a solution that works *only* with the
> > postscript device, then this can be achieved with device-control
> > escapes. Here's something to play around with. It redefines[*]
> > grops's basic text-printing functions to me
> If you're satisfied with a solution that works *only* with the
> postscript device, then this can be achieved with device-control
> escapes. Here's something to play around with. It redefines[*]
> grops's basic text-printing functions to memorize the position at
> the start of a piece of text
Mike Bianchi wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 09:35:54PM +0100, Ted Harding wrote:
>> :
>> One has the feeling that one could reach out and grasp it, but it
>> always seems to be just a few inches further away than the length
>> of one's arm ...
>
> “Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
> > What's needed is a macro that can be called inline in arg
> > 3 to start underlining, and another macro in arg 4 to stop
> > underlining. Even if ul.tmac could be coerced into behaving
> > this way (I've
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010, Ted Harding wrote:
> I made a serious attempt myself some years ago to try to crack the
> underlining problem. The basic issue, of course, is that .cu, or .ul,
> as you say, simply switches to "underlined font" (which in general
> is italic).
> ...
&
> What's needed is a macro that can be called inline in arg
> 3 to start underlining, and another macro in arg 4 to stop
> underlining. Even if ul.tmac could be coerced into behaving
> this way (I've tussled with it, without success), it seems
> to me that the macros in
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 09:35:54PM +0100, Ted Harding wrote:
> :
> One has the feeling that one could reach out and grasp it, but it
> always seems to be just a few inches further away than the length
> of one's arm ...
“Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?”
>
> Mom is set up such that in normal typeset copy (.PRINTSTYLE TYPESET),
>
> Some text \*[IT]more text\*[PREV] other text.
>
> renders in italic, but if one switches to
> typewriter-style output (.PRINTSTYLE TYPEWRITE), is
> underlined.
>
> The underlining is
e text\*[PREV] other text.
renders in italic, but if one switches to
typewriter-style output (.PRINTSTYLE TYPEWRITE), is
underlined.
The underlining is a gross hack that places an underscore beneath
each letter, with the result that spaces aren't underlined. In many
cases, this is ac
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010, Werner Lemberg wrote:
> Peter, what image support has mom?
Postscript only, via PSPIC. There's no special image handling in
mom.
> On an unrelated note, there's another thing I can't seem to figure
> out how to do, and that is to insert a full-page illustration in
> the mi
re I'm specifically inserting a hard
page break anyway, but I'd rather have the freedom to put them within
chapters if I can. Any thoughts?
Thanks again for the underlining help!
-- Sam.
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
> [Talking about ul.tmac]
&
>> You can't. I've thus defined a new macro `Underline1' which
>> handles trailing punctuation.
>
> In that sort of situation, it usually works to us "\c" to eliminate
> extra space introduced by the line break.
I haven't analyzed in detail why it fails...
> This word is
> .Underline1 underline
On 26-Aug-10 13:18:06, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
> [Talking about ul.tmac]
>
>> The first problem I'm having is that I can't seem to avoid having
>> spaces around my underlined material. For example:
>>
>> This word is
>> .Underline underlined
>> !
>>
>> This will cause a space to appear between
[Talking about ul.tmac]
> The first problem I'm having is that I can't seem to avoid having
> spaces around my underlined material. For example:
>
> This word is
> .Underline underlined
> !
>
> This will cause a space to appear between the word "underlined" and
> the "!" Do you know of a way
Yes, this does work. Thank you very much!!
Blake McBride
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:26 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
> > I think this is the solution to go, and I'll implement it if I have
> > time: Use an ms-like underlining macro if either .ce or .rj is
> > active.
&
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009, Werner Lemberg wrote:
> > I don't suppose there's any chance of underlining for the PostScript
> > device being implemented in groff itself, is there? Sure would make
> > things a lot easier.
>
> Please make suggestions how this could work.
> I think this is the solution to go, and I'll implement it if I have
> time: Use an ms-like underlining macro if either .ce or .rj is
> active.
Please try the attached version: .ce and .rj should now work as
expected.
Werner
.\" ul.tmac
.\"
.\" Copyright (C) 2
work reliably if you use it continuously
for more than a single line. I don't know whether this can be fixed.
> I don't suppose there's any chance of underlining for the PostScript
> device being implemented in groff itself, is there? Sure would make
> things a lot easier
zero.
On the other hand, saying
.ad c
works.
> .LP
> some text
> .ce 1
> .UL "Executive Summary"
> .LP
> and more text.
> And more text.
> And more text.
> And more text.
> And more text.
> And more text.
I think this is the solution to go, and I'll implement it if I have
time: Use an ms-like underlining macro if either .ce or .rj is active.
Werner
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 09:51:12PM -0400, Peter Schaffter wrote:
> Subject: Re: [Groff] Underlining in groff
>
> ... I don't suppose
> there's any chance of underlining for the PostScript device being
> implemented in groff itself, is there? Sure would make things a lo
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009, Blake McBride wrote:
> That kind-of works but I have two problems with it.
>
> 1. What if I'd rather use MM or MOM?
>
> 2. The underline is way too far below the line. If you try underlining a
> word within a paragraph it almost looks like a li
On 30-Jul-09 14:24:39, Blake McBride wrote:
> That kind-of works but I have two problems with it.
>
> 1. What if I'd rather use MM or MOM?
>
> 2. The underline is way too far below the line. If you try
> underlining a word within a paragraph it almost looks like a line
That kind-of works but I have two problems with it.
1. What if I'd rather use MM or MOM?
2. The underline is way too far below the line. If you try underlining a
word within a paragraph it almost looks like a line in the middle of two
text lines. It's is terrible. Basically, the b
Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 schrieb Blake McBride:
> Greetings,
>
> I know about troff using italics, and nroff using underlines, but I want to
> do underlines in groff (troff mode) too. I searched the net and found the
> ul.tmac (by Werner LEMBERG, version 1.0, 12/18/03). It partially works but
>
Greetings,
I know about troff using italics, and nroff using underlines, but I want to
do underlines in groff (troff mode) too. I searched the net and found the
ul.tmac (by Werner LEMBERG, version 1.0, 12/18/03). It partially works but
not well enough for me.
See: http://osdir.com/ml/printing.
Ted,
Problem solved. It was "Pilot error."
Thanks for the quick response. Your technique is most enlightening.
I knew about \z, but was not aware of \Z'...' sequences.
I used your technique and it works well.
I found the ghost line. It was from another line later in my
source file that I w
On 15-Mar-08 22:27:44, Clarke Echols wrote:
> I'm working on a document with a headline:
>
> Are You Sure You're Getting Maximum Value
>
> where the line is set in Helvetica bold with "Sure" set in
> HB italic. I want to underline the word "Sure", but I'm getting
> strange behavior from wha
I'm working on a document with a headline:
Are You Sure You're Getting Maximum Value
where the line is set in Helvetica bold with "Sure" set in
HB italic. I want to underline the word "Sure", but I'm getting
strange behavior from what I thought should be a legitimate approach.
Conditions a
70 matches
Mail list logo
