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 7CBE5C25B06 for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 22:59:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229486AbiHNW7H (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Aug 2022 18:59:07 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42690 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229450AbiHNW7G (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Aug 2022 18:59:06 -0400 Received: from mout02.posteo.de (mout02.posteo.de [185.67.36.66]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 836EE12AB9 for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 15:59:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23199240101 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 00:59:01 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.mx; s=2017; t=1660517942; bh=L0lrW94wABEmswbKvOTI6QmEh1JYhPad1xktJIdCsXE=; h=Date:From:Cc:To:Subject:From; b=CU9P5nI392VMcGdUb+1gKGbjueSZNmxsWSG2ciTe/Y7g7G/V46/bWY/419RpyvpjC iDUcXQwp9ZK9YIUvfN702JpoQ8k/smOUCqac5QgerJ3O/M7nQYL9Z1SxE8Ho3vwPmh xGxOL2w3NujRMeFK1y7ow545gWuPcHmioxdxaQtIFaSJ6iz/G8oUYww5TglOVVFWMB ZQqtxQfE5nL4pW6msCLKSv80VYOJl2exVbE1TMXzJKqldZstpy4pC2UZN9b2Nvwxgd Emv1GrCFmZYWICVQ+U1vraIzpYfbmHMkeD3sux3gIzihnn9ha2f6oUGMuTl3CSycad v3cthuwMDNp4w== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4M5XsJ2vndz9rxG; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 00:59:00 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 22:58:59 +0000 Message-Id: From: "DJ Chase" Cc: "Ingo Schwarze" , "Alejandro Colomar" , , To: "G. Branden Robinson" Subject: Re: Standardize roff (was: *roff `\~` support) References: <20220730161521+0200.203910-stepnem@gmail.com> <8edd0272-0c43-b5e7-9220-20094bb5ae23@gmail.com> <20220811201714.a2o432xhkyyyj6qi@illithid> <20220812221035.xd4udngmz5erht5p@illithid> <20220814223529.tibd5roy5mtds3xv@illithid> In-Reply-To: <20220814223529.tibd5roy5mtds3xv@illithid> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 6:35 PM EDT, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > At 2022-08-14T14:49:10+0000, DJ Chase wrote: > > On Sun Aug 14, 2022 at 9:56 AM EDT, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > > DJ Chase wrote on Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 05:27:34PM +0000: > > > > > > > Have we ever considered a de jure *roff standard? > > > > > > No, i think that would be pure madness given the amount of working > > > time available in any of the roff projects. > > Mark your calendars--Ingo and I are in substantial agreement. ;-) > > > This is very sad to hear. > > I think the take-away here is that the decision to formally standardize > a technology, like many things, is an economic one. There are costs and > benefits. Being seduced by the benefits without a full understanding of > the costs often leads to remorse. (And, in many domains, fat > commissions for sales personnel.) > > > That=E2=80=99s probably because *I* massively overrate the importance o= f > > standardization (I mean I literally carry a standards binder with me). > > Still, though, it=E2=80=99s rather annoying that end users =E2=80=94 es= pecially > > programmers =E2=80=94 don=E2=80=99t value standards as much. > > I think it is less that programmers value standards in the wrong amount, > than that they disregard them for the wrong reasons--like "moving fast" > and building fragile solutions that will cost more on the back end after > higher-paid decision makers have moved on to greener pastures. > > Nothing succeeds like handing your successor a trash fire. > > > Would an informal de jure standard > > You just defined "de facto standard". ;-) > > "De jure" is Latin for "of the law". If something is not codified in > "law", or a normative document like a formal standard, then what is > "standard" is simply the intersection of prevailing practices. By =E2=80=9Cinformal de jure=E2=80=9D, I meant =E2=80=98de jure, but writte= n in an informal manner=E2=80=99. > > be of any use? Like how TOML just has a specification, but it=E2=80=99s > > somewhat usable as a standard because it=E2=80=99s been pretty stable a= nd > > because it=E2=80=99s written clearly enough. > > A purely descriptive document, mainly comprising a matrix of features > with escape sequence, request, and predefined register names on one axis > and the names of implementations on the other, with version numbers and > commentary populating the elements, could be a useful thing to have. I=E2=80=99m on it (except not really, because we=E2=80=99re in the middle o= f a move, school resumes shortly, and etc. But eventually=E2=84=A2, I=E2=80=99m on it= ). Cheers, --=20 DJ Chase They, Them, Theirs