fuji@oatsun19.oa.csk.CO.JP (Masahiro Fujishima) (04/26/91)
I'm one of the troff users of Japan. (Do you understand my funny english?) There are some of questions for DOCUMENTER'S WORKBENCH Release 2.0 (DWB2.0). Firstly, about tbl preprocesser; The tbl preprocesser isn't output tables correctly which are large table data especially when there are changed page. Vertical lines are not draw. Is this a bug? Secondly, about ms macro package; I usually write some of text using ms macro package, but DWB2.0 can't use ms macro package. So I tried to use ms macro of 4.3 BSD, but the output were not correct. When changed page, the line of tbl was tilted. Please tell me the ms macro package for DWB2.0 when it is exist. -- Masahiro Fujishima(fuji@oa.csk.co.jp)
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) (04/30/91)
The -ms macros, used mostly by Bell Labs Research and Universities, are distributed with DWB 3.1. You may get partial success under 2.0 using -mm instead.
pstowne@zargon.lerc.nasa.gov (Charlie Towne) (04/30/91)
In article <1991Apr29.205801.4952@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > >The -ms macros, used mostly by Bell Labs Research and >Universities, are distributed with DWB 3.1. I'm a little confused. In "UNIX Text Processing" by Dougherty & O'Reilly, it says that the ms macros are "no longer officially supported by AT&T." That's the main reason I started using mm. Is this no longer true? Was it ever? -- Charlie Towne Email: pstowne@zargon.lerc.nasa.gov MS 5-11 Phone: (216) 433-5851 NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH 44135
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) (05/01/91)
In article <1991Apr30.130418.8856@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>, pstowne@zargon.lerc.nasa.gov (Charlie Towne) writes: > In article <1991Apr29.205801.4952@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > > > >The -ms macros, used mostly by Bell Labs Research and > >Universities, are distributed with DWB 3.1. > > I'm a little confused. In "UNIX Text Processing" by Dougherty & O'Reilly, > it says that the ms macros are "no longer officially supported by AT&T." > That's the main reason I started using mm. Is this no longer true? Was > it ever? > Undoubtedly, AT&T misled you. Since DWB 2.0 was generally unsupported, -ms was too :-). Not only is it alive-- the new page makeup macros are based on it. -mm is generally more feature-rich, but more complex and weighty as a result. Inside AT&T far more people use -mm than -ms, but it's your choice.