LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

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

Hi Will,

> post (or rather, never received it and read it through the archives at
> some stage) where you go into detail about your thoughts on this
> matter.

I'll try to find them. Right now I'm hearing Berg's Wozzeck, so
I'm not sure I'n in the mood ;-).

But one of my concerns was related to the number of specifications:

> probably the time to discuss things again. I think the recent letters
> by Morten, Joseph and I on the different "argument specifications"
> showed that there are many different cases to consider, and also lots
> of scope for different solutions.

Many, too many. This might lead to a combinatorial explosion.

Another point was the inconsistency in the prefix identifying
the module (I proposed something like \module:name:suffix, but
I'm not sure this is feasible because how : is handled).

(Unfortunately I'm busy and very likely I'll be busy in the
near future, and I'm a lot more interested in LaTeX + LuaTeX,
to be honest.)

Javier
-----------------------------
http://www.tex-tipografia.com