## LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

 Options: Use Forum View Use Monospaced Font Show HTML Part by Default Condense Mail Headers Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>] Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>] Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

I am working on a new implementation of my 'extramarks' package, based on the '\marks' command.
To get a clean namespace, I would prefix all internal commands with '\extramarks@', or \extramarks_' in expl3 syntax (which I am slowly learning now). However, this causes the names to get quite long.

So I was thinking of changing that to something shorter, and I came up with \xmarks@'/'\xmarks_', and then 'xmarks' for the package name, and in fact I already did that edit. But then I remembered that in the past there had been an 'xmarks' or 'xmarks2' package by the LaTeX team.

My package has a completely different implementation than these, by the way, although there is a similarity in purpose.

Looking in the Github repository, I found that that these packages have been ditched. So does this mean the package name 'xmarks' is no up for grabs, or does the LaTeX team still hold some rights to the name? If it is not available, suggestions for an alternative short name are welcome.

With kind regards,
--
Pieter van Oostrum
www: http://pieter.vanoostrum.org/
PGP key: [8DAE142BE17999C4]