From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout.scc.kit.edu (mailout.scc.kit.edu [129.13.185.202]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sAJI2t8g001448 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:02:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from hekate.usta.de (asta-nat.asta.uni-karlsruhe.de [172.22.63.82]) by scc-mailout-02.scc.kit.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1Xr9af-0004hm-EQ; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:02:53 +0100 Received: from donnerwolke.usta.de ([172.24.96.3]) by hekate.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr9af-00044w-D9; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:02:53 +0100 Received: from iris.usta.de ([172.24.96.5] helo=usta.de) by donnerwolke.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr9af-0003ZV-9w; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:02:53 +0100 Received: from schwarze by usta.de with local (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr9aZ-0008LP-5e; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:02:47 +0100 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:02:46 +0100 From: Ingo Schwarze To: "Anthony J. Bentley" Cc: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: groff/mandoc rendering difference with Lk Message-ID: <20141119180246.GC28366@iris.usta.de> References: <27703.1416387354@cathet.us> X-Mailinglist: mdocml-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <27703.1416387354@cathet.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Hi Anthony, Anthony J. Bentley wrote on Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 01:55:54AM -0700: > .Sh SEE ALSO > .Lk http://example.com/ The example homepage . > > This fragment renders as so in mandoc: > > SEE ALSO > The example homepage: http://example.com/. > > But it renders like this in groff: > > SEE ALSO > The: http://example.com/ example homepage. > > Unless this is a recent behavior change in groff (and thus a bug), As far as i know, the .Lk macro is a groff addition. Heirloom, for example, doesn't have it. Similar macros taking free text arguments - An Cd Fd Mt Sx - all accept an unlimited number of arguments, so .Lk should, too. Only a few macros taking very special syntax elements as arguments - Lb In St - limit their number of arguments in this way. The odd behaviour of .Lk does not improve usability. No one in their right mind would put the text following a macro on the same line. Even if it works and the macro stops processing arguments after a fixed number of arguments, it is much clearer to put following text on the next line. > mandoc should probably match the rendering so that mandoc users > don't forget to quote the arguments. This is one of the cases where i considered the behaviour of groff so insane that i consciously chose to not follow. I think groff should be fixed, i just didn't come round to do it. Yours, Ingo -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv