Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:10:54 +0100 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Am 11.01.2012 22:16, schrieb Joseph Wright:
> On 31/12/2011 23:09, Joseph Wright wrote:
>> 1) How should we refer to catcode in documentation, both in terms of
>> the text and the formatting (for example, do we want to say
>> something line 'category code<other>')?
>
> Unless I hear that there are strong objections, I propose to make a
> change here as I indicate above, using the name of each category code as
> described in the naming of \char_set_catcode_... and using formatting
>
> category code \meta{<description>}~(<code>)
well, I'm not sure I parse this line. To me "code" implies more a number
than something like "other". I'm fine with statements like "character
category <other>" but less so with "category code <other>"
or is the above to read as
category code \meta{other} (12)
>> 2) What should we do for \char_show_value_catcode:n? 'show_value' is
>> not the right name for showing a symbolic meaning. I guess we just
>> use \prg_case_int:nnn to actually show the meaning.
if you want to go for symbolic then you could have
\char_show_category:n {x} -> <letter>
and drop "code" from the cs name
cheers
frank
|
|
|