On 17/09/2008, at 10:29 PM, Joseph Wright wrote:

> Something like ctable, or in some other way?

Yes, quite a bit like ctable.
I haven't really thought it through more than that it would take me a  
long time I don't have :)

> Well no, but this comes back to a point I've raised before.  It's hard
> to know what might need to be written in LaTeX3 as there is no way to
> tell what will and won't be in the kernel + required packages (or even
> what might be in!).  So I can't tell if I might be better knocking up
> something like amstext myself, or whether things like the font  
> detection
> I do in siunitx will still have to be done in the package, or whether
> the kernel might handle some of this.

I think for now assume that anything that's written with the expl3  
package(s) is to be used in a LaTeX2e environment. I guess I consider  
it a bit like the etoolbox package: it provides package writers with  
better tools  to do their job. Worry about LaTeX3 when there's actual  
talk of formats being built that drop LaTeX2e support.

(Err, agreed, everyone?)

This way you can minimise the code you have to write (since whichever  
LaTeX2e package provides it) and it will perhaps become clearer which  
(currently external) packages do need to be pulled into the kernel.

Will