LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional 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, 10 Sep 2018 23:09:10 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Am 07.09.18 um 16:36 schrieb Benedikt Vitecek:
> 
> I would like to register two package prefixes, but as there was a 
> discussion about prefixes in June (I think)
> I also wanted to ask if the prefixes are „okay“ (or if they are too 
> general). Both packages are already
> at CTAN for some years now, but changing the prefixes – if necessary – 
> wouldn’t be a problem. Back then
> I have chosen the prefixes simply to be equal to the package names.

Hi Benedikt,

update to my earlier statement.

Maybe cooking_units should be reconsidered and replaced perhaps by 
"cookingunits" without the underscore. Point is, conceptually the module 
name is really just everything up to the first underscore there is not 
concepts of only supporting  sub-modules yet.

Of course we could invent the notion of modules that can only be used 
with a submodule part but I'm not sure that this is really a good idea. 
So perhaps better is to simply drip the underscore and call it cookingunits


regards
frank

ATOM RSS1 RSS2