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:
Robin Fairbairns <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:54:02 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
Uwe Lueck <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Somewhat contrary to Will: the "endorsed" packages needn't be loaded
> unless the user chooses an option that needs a certain package. This
> way such an interface would "support" or "cover" certain packages,
> rather than "endorsing" some. 

agreed.

and (from reading the docs) there seems no reason why the average
package-writer-on-the-street should not write his own
interfaces-pwots-package to tie in with interfaces.  (note, i've not
actually read the code yet, so i may be wrong here.

> This also reminds me of memoir.cls, "endorsing" (copying) certain
> "standard" packages; yet I have never studied by which commands the
> features of those packages are accessed by the user. 

memoir uses the code of packages that peter wilson wrote as he was
designing ... memoir.  i don't think i would have spotted the purpose of
the packages if peter hadn't occasionally mentioned it when submitting
packages.

as a development strategy, it seems quite neat, to me ... but it does
make faq answer-writing a little tortuous: "you can use memoir or
koma-script or package x, y or z to do this; package y is actually part
of memoir".

robin

ATOM RSS1 RSS2