From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDBE6C19F2C for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 06:26:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230013AbiHPG0Y (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:26:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55508 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230016AbiHPG0G (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:26:06 -0400 Received: from scc-mailout-kit-01.scc.kit.edu (scc-mailout-kit-01.scc.kit.edu [IPv6:2a00:1398:9:f712::810d:e751]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0C5834F3F7 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 17:33:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hekate.asta.kit.edu ([2a00:1398:5:f401::77]) by scc-mailout-kit-01.scc.kit.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (envelope-from ) id 1oNkWP-003tbG-5l; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:33:29 +0200 Received: from login-1.asta.kit.edu ([2a00:1398:5:f400::72]) by hekate.asta.kit.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1oNkWN-007NF5-Uw; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:33:27 +0200 Received: from schwarze by login-1.asta.kit.edu with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oNkWN-0006SW-U3; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:33:27 +0200 Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:33:27 +0200 From: Ingo Schwarze To: Alejandro Colomar Cc: g.branden.robinson@gmail.com, groff@gnu.org, linux-man@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: TAB character in groff output Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hi Alejandro, Alejandro Colomar wrote on Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 12:01:40AM +0200: > Ingo, is mandoc(1) planning to support .MR? Yes, almost certainly. I'm not enthusiastic about it, but given that groff is going ahead with it, it is clearly better to support it than to not support it. The most likely timing for adding support is shortly after the next groff release. Before the groff release, it isn't urgent at all for obvious reasons. Right now, i'm slowly working through inconsistencies that popped up in the mandoc test suite after regenerating the expected output with -current groff. Getting that sorted out before the groff release would be ideal because some of these issues might be regressions in groff (like the groff_mdoc(7) prologue regressions i reported earlier). What makes this work a bit tedious is that apparently, not all changes that popped up are groff regressions. For example, for the second change is i looked into, it appears behaviour is mostly consistent between GNU, Heirloom, and Plan 9 roff and it is mandoc that is off, so there is no need to report that here and i'm instead fixing mandoc (it is related to literal tab characters in filled text). Eleven new differences are left right now and i suspect these are likely due to at least four and probably not more than eight different changes; the exact number of issues is not clear yet. Most are differences in vertical spacing, but in different contexts, so there is likely more than one vertical spacing issue. One difference concerns paragraph breaking, one concerns horizontal spacing, and two concern the scope of font markup. Yours, Ingo