LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

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
Subject:
From:
Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:33:04 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Lars, David

I don't mind either way and happily leave the decision to David but one
question:

 > Compare with the case for the NFSS fontdef tokens. I understood the meaning
 > of e.g. \T1/pad/m/n/12 (when TeX was showling an hlist) the first time I
 > looked at it, but it took several months before I realised how tricky it
 > really was.

how tricky was what?

are you saying that the decision within NFSS was good or bad? I mean it
disallows / as part of a name but it resulted in (given the length) quite
readable names, didn't it? and in practice the use of / did not result in any
practical problems (or does the above statement mean you tried to call a
family something/something and then noticed that this is not working?)

so perhaps using / for separation so that you get

 \TP@I/frontmatter/heading/section

might be an option too. it would have the advantage of splitting csnames in
their parts is a bit simpler.

frank

ATOM RSS1 RSS2