Hi!

At present:
-- >8 --
$ printf '.At v7\n\n.At 32v' | ./mandoc -mdoc
UNTITLED                             LOCAL                            UNTITLED

Version 7 AT&T UNIX

Version 32V AT&T UNIX
-- >8 --

But I believe it should read:
-- >8 -
$ printf '.At v7\n\n.At 32v' | ./mandoc -mdoc
UNTITLED                             LOCAL                            UNTITLED

Version 7 AT&T UNIX

AT&T UNIX/32V
-- >8 --

My reasoning being that 32V is a direct port of V7 to the VAX
with single-digit and non-formative new utilities (tsort, ..?);
bundling it in with V[1234567] is, at its best, disingenuous,
and, at worst, just plainly wrong.

The designations of early unices originate in their manuals;
how does 32V stack up here?

/usr/man/man0/title:
-- >8 --
            Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated
                       Holmdel, New Jersey

                  UNIX/32V PROGRAMMER’S MANUAL

                           Version 1.0

                         February, 1979
-- >8 --

/usr/man/man0/title] (TM in superscript):
-- >8 --
‐‐

  UNIXTM/32V TIME‐SHARING SYSTEM:

                    UNIX PROGRAMMER’S MANUAL

                      Version 1.0, Volume 1

                         February, 1979

            Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated
                       Holmdel, New Jersey
-- >8 --

In both cases, the manual is designated as Version 1.0 for "UNIX/32V".
The fundamental .At contract is to include "AT&T UNIX",
hence why I think "AT&T UNIX/32V" is best.

32V is available for autopsy at
  http://ftp.okass.net/pub/mirror/minnie.tuhs.org/Distributions/USDL/32V/32v_usr.tar.gz

For the record and paralleling major implementations,
I've raised this as for groff as Debian #991633:
  https://bugs.debian.org/991633
The same reasoning is laid out there, no comments at this time.

Looking forward to your thoughts!

Best,
наб