From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se (smtp-2.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.160]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o63CRS9O027452 for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2010 08:27:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D7114C223 for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2010 14:27:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se ([127.0.0.1]) by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (smtp-2.sys.kth.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id o-tlI66QADpj for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2010 14:27:22 +0200 (CEST) X-KTH-Auth: kristaps [85.8.60.201] X-KTH-mail-from: kristaps@bsd.lv X-KTH-rcpt-to: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Received: from lappy.bsd.lv (h85-8-60-201.dynamic.se.alltele.net [85.8.60.201]) by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8201B14C12F for ; Sat, 3 Jul 2010 14:27:22 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4C2F2CA9.2030209@bsd.lv> Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:27:21 +0200 From: Kristaps Dzonsons User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080812) X-Mailinglist: mdocml-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: desired .Bk semantics? References: <20100702234320.GC6026@iris.usta.de> <20100703065442.GA5970@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20100703065442.GA5970@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> after much headbanging while trying to understand tmac files, >> i guess i finally figured out what .Bk -words is supposed to do. >> It seems it has nothing to do with macros, but simply with - >> lines in the input file! My impression is that .Bk -words >> avoids line breaks inside the output generated from each input >> line. Perhaps that's why it is called -words (as opposed to -line). >> Duh. >> > > according to mdoc.samples(7) it is useful for "preventing line breaks in > the middle of options", and that is how i've always used it. i just > realised that the same piece of text notes that the effect was once > achieved using the Op macro. Ingo, if you and Jason think this is worth the effort (and correct), then by all means. HOWEVER. `Bk' is a turd that should be flushed: it gives the author unnecessary control over output. This is wrong. What we should do is ignore `Bk' and follow an easy algorithm for SYNOPSIS mode regarding breaking between children. This, I think, is easier for us and manual writers alike. Is `Bk' used often outside of this where .nr nS 1 is otherwise unacceptable (like those OpenBSD .9 manuals)? Kristaps -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv