Hi, Joseph Wright a écrit : > I'd imagine that the code needs a careful overhaul at some stage, as > things are very much a mish-mash at the the moment. However, that > depends on what we want, as you say. For example, the gmdoc approach of > not needing \begin{macrocode} ... \end{macrocode} is interesting: I > wonder if it makes it easier for new users to write documented files? > As a matter of personnal feeling, I'm really tired of the dtx format. If find it too complicated to write, read and modify. In general (for my normal documents also) I prefer rather light markup and dtx format seems like the opposite of light to me. I didn't have time to look too deeply in gmdoc, but I tend to think it is a more usable approach. While discussing l3doc, I'd like to make a quite unrelated remark (to which JF would most probably agree). It would be great to think that a documentation is not necessarily just a PDF, but that some information may be converted in other format and/or reused in applications (eg a webapp like Context's (I can't remember the name right now, or a database of which package defines which command, etc.). While LaTeX output in many formats (esp. XHTML-based) is a difficult problem in general, some parts of a documentation, such as the command syntax and a summary of the arguments, are a subset with sufficiently "rigid" structure so that it should be doable. I don't know if some such things was allready planed or at least discussed, so just to be sure... Manuel.