From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 760f4ac4 for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 19:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 382AD9BD6B; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:36:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D112C93D21; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:36:20 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="Q6rhybri"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2EE1993D21; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:36:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f42.google.com (mail-wr1-f42.google.com [209.85.221.42]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04B0293D07 for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:36:19 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f42.google.com with SMTP id a11so26959296wrx.1 for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 12:36:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zMAhrByU+h6QjybOh3bmEqLKDNsKwB/r+qq4kF+asbc=; b=Q6rhybrie/q0sxCvnxVCeDeRlfAbQi0xJpZnXVnIhvK6KgFN+7fkfNmu//D9QVAcG4 DrumnJ/BHOZ2UCzCM0YtiwMikopPCAqoXVorZaCYXXa5CF8RYhIGbORwZm7IvvwSo73f iZtZBnZntw1t6l7jRN/Nj3VedxhiM6H4zZSik= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zMAhrByU+h6QjybOh3bmEqLKDNsKwB/r+qq4kF+asbc=; b=AtwOyQVHkv0EtwWH6cP7p5NNemcAby/TbysmW7W6s71BoCqT+bL1wlJtpmf40qnidt za/i1CN9qRZu9DqA8LkLQeKMQ3ESyHqqLQMJ4FOUD/+UaKY913+oO5qW8enNIIvETjwl XpA3BRvq35AHqK8OP3talslCIlXGCjs5PRCY44Llxq+bdSo+dUaDkv9o6WCJ9Qilwv93 tUMBNtsb9rMwlM5Zu8HYaQn0MrxWe+Nn0df835D27Wn5WRQTGhzIKdiLhsmkZumq+pqV ObeZbxZj1OHfjqF4Fxp7bN4oHyjtyy+jatQXU8U++PNmtburmDYuh9WBQVlFhimyUl2Z I1BQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW8isrx8Hc63w+Wu/L4k3DDmkVkxKn7NQxE+R7tykI8DL3i12/s xTuEXaEd49w1pJnK8tKK2SVGEaVsvRdce8cdgVbpcbQ0aBc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxNEoVR/w9WV03FPqVMBZ14pXxC9Q1tNAdpAtCsPC05CxoY98gd4fDfLOmDjhgjWHlezlIV7ZR3dNLpR4c5nQE= X-Received: by 2002:adf:e591:: with SMTP id l17mr47589802wrm.199.1568576177508; Sun, 15 Sep 2019 12:36:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <201909132024.x8DKObEP013266@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <463d5cc4-9bef-9ac3-a680-a5161d664dc1@aueb.gr> <20190913221345.GA16129@minnie.tuhs.org> <20190914020240.GO2046@mcvoy.com> <20190914024433.GA19193@minnie.tuhs.org> <2e84c4d0-5239-b223-856d-00aacf8d3028@andrewnesbit.org> In-Reply-To: <2e84c4d0-5239-b223-856d-00aacf8d3028@andrewnesbit.org> From: Clem Cole Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2019 15:35:52 -0400 Message-ID: To: "U'll Be King of the Stars" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000dd2ce705929c99cd" Subject: Re: [TUHS] earliest Unix roff X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000dd2ce705929c99cd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:03 PM U'll Be King of the Stars < ullbeking@andrewnesbit.org> wrote: > > I've been wondering whether it is possible and worthwhile to use *roff > for complex technical documentation. I've always loved the aesthetic > that books produced using *roff have but there are other reasons too. > Ditto. The books that used roff can look clean and within a series are usually consistent, but what I've like is that they are different. The Prentiss-Hall series and the ORA books both were produced using troff and different versions of ms, but the results are different. One of my complained with LaTex books is they all seem to look the same. > Getting back to *roff, does anybody know if there is a (hopefully rich) > repository of macros, or any other resources, for my use case? > I've never seen one. As far as I knew it, publishers sometimes seeded authors. ORA used the Masscomp/Tektronix derived version of ms (-mS) that Steve Talbot created (and Rick LeFaivre originally created from the original Lesk V7 set). Rich Steven's has his own additions to the version of ms that came with groff which I have also seen. --000000000000dd2ce705929c99cd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:0= 3 PM U'll Be King of the Stars <ullbeking@andrewnesbit.org> wrote:

I've been wondering whether it is possible and worthwhile to use *roff =
for complex technical documentation.=C2=A0 I've always loved the aesthe= tic
that books produced using *roff have but there are other reasons too.
Ditto.=C2=A0 The books that used roff can look clean and with= in a series are usually consistent, but what I've like is that they are= different.
The Prentiss-Hall=C2=A0series and the ORA books both we= re produced using troff and different versions of ms, but the results are d= ifferent.

One of my complained with LaTex books is the= y all seem to look the same.


Getting back to *roff, does anybody know if there is a (hopefully rich)=
repository of macros, or any other resources, for my use case?=C2=A0
I've never seen one.=C2=A0=C2=A0 As far a= s I knew it, publishers sometimes seeded authors.=C2=A0 ORA used the Massco= mp/Tektronix derived=C2=A0version of ms (-mS) that Steve Talbot created (an= d Rick LeFaivre originally created from the original Lesk V7 set).=C2=A0 = =C2=A0Rich Steven's=C2=A0has his own additions to the version of ms tha= t came with groff which I have also seen.=C2=A0 =C2=A0
--000000000000dd2ce705929c99cd--