Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site kuling.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!enea!kuling!andersa
From: andersa@kuling.UUCP (Anders Andersson)
Newsgroups: net.text
Subject: Re: troff special chars - naming them
Message-ID: <768@kuling.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 22-Jul-85 03:05:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: kuling.768
Posted: Mon Jul 22 03:05:56 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Jul-85 07:20:09 EDT
References: <1065@diku.UUCP> <763@mcvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: andersa@kuling.UUCP (Anders Andersson)
Organization: Uppsala University, Sweden
Lines: 20

In article <763@mcvax.UUCP> aeb@mcvax.UUCP (Andries Brouwer) writes:
>In article <1065@diku.UUCP> keld@diku.UUCP (Keld J|rn Simonsen) writes:
>>
>>I would like to discuss special char naming in troff (titroff/ditroff)
>> ...
>>The rules: when a letter is composed of an accent and a latin letter
>>you specify the accent first. Accents used: ' ` : , ~ ^ maybe more.
>>
>>Special letters not accented: ae AE oe OE /o /O oa oA (Aangstroem)
>>ij IJ ss. The meaning should be obvious.
>>
>I think we should include the graphics used in eastern european countries
>[or, more generally, all characters used in countries where the Latin
> alphabet is used]

This suggestion seems to be a re-invention of what already exists in TeX,
so why not just take it as it is? TeX defines all those national letters
in almost the same way, and I think it's a bad idea to have two such
similar standards, causing lots of problems for those poor guys who have
to learn both.