LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Fri, 13 Apr 2001 22:17:51 +0200
text/plain (47 lines)
 > Despite my not knowing whether the release of a new LaTeX2e*-y package is
 > that much to mention anymore

yes please, mention it, it looks great though I'm a bit horrified to see that
somebody really attempted to let galley2 loose on the world :-)

as I said in the mail the other day, I really don't consider that package
being "usable" in a real practical sense. But if you prove me wrong, so much
the better.

 > Frank's mail the other day sounded like at least template and something
 > like xhj was fairly close to getting properly released, and I would
 > consider that a Good Thing.

so would I but I leave updating template.dtx to other David or others (for the
moment at least) and like you work within its limits.
seems I gaveyou the wrong impression: what is going to be released before May
is a fromt matter package (and perhaps with it a simple xhj version that works
without galley2 so that i don't run into problems using the frontmatter
package in the real world :-)

 > I'd still like to announce the availability of my own docindex/docidx2e
 > package, which can be found on CTAN in macros/latex/exptl/xdoc/ since about
 > a day.

for some reason the xdocdemo.tex file the readme talks about is not on CTAN
(though the ftp search has it in its cache)

 > >From the more general perspective of LaTeX2e* development I suspect that
 > the most interesting feature of the docindex package is that there is also
 > a docidx2e package, which is docindex "downgraded" to work without any
 > LaTeX2e* packages but still following the same general logic. I believe the
 > comparison of programming styles can elucidate the advantages there are
 > with the templated style (even for those who have mastered the classical
 > style).
 > I also think the markup of template definitions etc. came out quite well.
 > People who are themselves writing templated packages may find it worth
 > while to take a look at the typeset sources for that reason alone.

this is really good news to hear for me and I would hope that a few others
would follow your advice.

good night