Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!std-unix
From: colonel%sunybcs%math.waterloo.edu@relay.cs.net
Newsgroups: mod.std.unix
Subject: ditroff escapes
Message-ID: <7067@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Feb-87 10:04:49 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.7067
Posted: Tue Feb  3 10:04:49 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Feb-87 05:39:37 EST
Sender: std-unix@ut-sally.UUCP
Reply-To: colonel%sunybcs%math.waterloo.edu@relay.cs.net
Organization: Jack of Clubs Precision Instruments
Lines: 23
Keywords: iso latin
Approved: jsq@sally.utexas.edu
Responding-System: sunybcs.UUCP


>From: colonel@sunybcs.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman)

[ I'm not sure whether this is the right newsgroup for this,
but let's see what sort of response it gets.  -mod ]

To forestall bash-paren madness, why don't we agree on some ditroff
escape sequences for the ISO Latin 8-bit set?

One issue was discussed in net.internat a while ago... People seem
to prefer to read top-to-bottom, so for example
                    ,
	\('o	for o
but	\(c,	for c
		    '
What about the non-alphabetics?  And how do people feel about \(ss
vs. \(sz?
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel
CS: colonel@buffalo-cs
BI: colonel@sunybcs, csdsiche@ubvms

Volume-Number: Volume 9, Number 47