From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 02:56:50 -0500 From: Russ Cox To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] htmlroff In-Reply-To: <7359f0490601042345p5a4e1abdj1bb77f81cd87aa2f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <7359f0490601042345p5a4e1abdj1bb77f81cd87aa2f@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: d22e1084-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > If I remember right - and I might not - I looked into an > html driver or terminal type for troff, but gave up and > did man2html instead, which took a radically smpler > tack than ms2html and scored a little better overall > but much worse in some cases. I agree that modifying troff to add a driver wouldn't work, because troff still thinks it is in charge of various layout decisions and works at too low a level. Troff2html fails (when it does) for basically the same reasons. Ms2html, while originally intended to handle the -ms macros directly, now has machinery in it to run arbitrary troff macros. I think that if this were fleshed out and a few primtives for HTML added, then the HTML and -ms details could be moved completely out into macro libraries. > Don't you think a better long-term plan would be > to abandon troff? Yes. But for what? Russ