On 10/06/2009, at 4:39 PM, Joseph Wright wrote: > This is, I think, a good idea. However, I wonder if a second level of > control might be a good thing. At the moment, the first section > contains > all of the documentation. However, if you consider some user > package, it > would be helpful to have the user functions and internal stuff > documented separately. I agree that adding this sort of markup can be useful. In an HTML-like way, we could write, e.g., \begin[class=documentation]{textblock} \begin[class=user-functions]{textblock} \end{textblock} \begin[class=internal-functions]{textblock} \end{textblock} \end{textblock} Of course, these could then be wrapped up into environments again to make them convenient to type in the document. But I'd like to start thinking how we can use generic document elements like this for a variety of tasks. (Bits and pieces come to mind; \begin{figure} could be a shorthand for \begin[class=figure,display=float]{textblock}, for example.) I'm not sure of any class/package that tackles things in this sort of way. The extract package is the only one I know of to conditionally put bits and pieces of a generic document together. Will