I've drawn up a syntax proposal <https://gist.github.com/vermiculus/d8ac080f3f8c7ec2bed6#file-idea-org> (as an Org file) on GitHub: https://gist.github.com/vermiculus/d8ac080f3f8c7ec2bed6#file-idea-org I'm attaching the Org file itself and the (tangled) example syntax for those of you who use Gnus or a similar client. I've managed to *completely* screw up my environment as far as my own email goes, unfortunately… Best, Sean On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 1:14 AM, Sean Allred <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > There was recently a conversation on TeX.SX [1] between (mainly) Joseph > Wright and myself. Please see that site for the full conversation that > prompted this. > > Disclaimer: I'm a huge fan of the template idea. It is a good system > and I don't want it to see unnecessary change. > > Disclaimer to the disclaimer: it's the only design management paradigm > that I've come into contact with in regards to TeX. :) > > I'd like to raise attention to a possible issue with xtemplate's > design. Currently, an 'object' can receive no more than nine arguments > per TeX's syntax limitations: you cannot refer to a tenth argument in a > macro definition. That is, > > \DeclareObject { foo } { 10 } > > will fail. In TeX terms, this makes total sense. You cannot have more > than nine mandatory arguments for any single macro---that's just the way > it is. But speaking in terms of design, there are instances where such > an object can have more than nine arguments. In reality, this is the > decision of the document designer. There should be no such limitation > on the design. > > I'll refer you to the original post for Joseph's full answer, but his > suggestion is, in my opinion, a very appropriate one: going for a > completely key--value interface on the design layer (note: not the > author layer). It would certainly remove the limitation on the number > of mandatory qualities an object may have. It would also seem to be > more befitting of the verbose clarity of the design layer to do this. > > I'd like to call for thoughts on the topic. Again, I strongly recommend > you read Jospeh's response to my question [1]. I recognize that the > premise of the question might be flawed---in this instance (no pun > intended), it would likely be more appropriate to create a template with > all of the 'extras'---but the concern is valid and genuine. > > All the best, > Sean > > [1]: http://tex.stackexchange.com/q/196285 > > -- > Sean Allred > -- Sean Allred