RE: [Groff] Why is it...

[Nick Stoughton]

On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 18:51 +0000, address@hidden wrote:
> I pointed out the many O'Reilly books typeset with groff,
> and the fact that (at least at the time and for some years
> later) that the Collins Language Dictionaries were typeset
> using troff (and later groff), after translating from XML. 

And if you are looking for other examples, several international
standards, including both the C and POSIX standards, are good examples
of large, popular, *roff based publications (and always have been).

The current version of POSIX (due to be published next year) is almost
4,000 pages of hyperlinked PDF (thanks to Keith Marshall's pdfmark
macros) in a supserset of the mm macros (with a good amount of tbl and
eqn preprocessor). And if we had to start over again, though there are a
few TeX proponents around the committees, I am certain we would use
groff again ....
-- 
Nick Stoughton                          Cell: 510 388 1413
USENIX Standards Liaison                Fax:  510 548 5738