Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.ABDF1C44@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:51 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.ABDF1C44" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: doc.sty + small projects! Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 19:52:54 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 719 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.ABDF1C44 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I'm using newdoc.sty, and I've set \MakeShortVerb{"} so that > I can just say "\blahblah" to get my verbatim stuff. It's > very convenient. This is by the way an old suggestion by the very person who wrote this :-) By the way, one should say \MakeShortVerb{\"} not just {"} this may look a bit funny but that's the way it is. The other form does work most of the time but not always and may be rejected by the next release. > But I run into trouble in moving arguments: section titles > and footnotes, and \protect doesn't seem to help. \verb never works inside an argument and it will also not work if masquerading as "...". This is a \TeX limitation and will be probably even be partly there in ltx3. > Furthermore, the workaround using \bslash doesn't work in > footnotes: you get ``. That's not tru \bslash only produces a `\' in the current font, if the font doesn't provide one in that position bad luck. One needs to say something like {\tt\bslash foo}, also {\tt\string\foo} will work. > I could probably answer this next one myself, especially when > doc.doc comes out. But why is it that even when I say > \DisableCrossrefs, if I say \PageIndex I still get a filename.idx > file generated. Am I missing something? Actually, couldn't we > do without \Enable/\DisableCrossrefs, and just have index > generation turned on and off by \Pageindex/\Codelineindex? \Enable/\DisableCrossrefs only decide whether or not crossreference index entries are generated. A master index coming from \begin{macro} and \Describe... is always produces when one uses \Pageindex/\Codelineindex. Does this help? > I have a sneaky feeling I'm missing something in all this. > (My marbles?) Maybe we don't want to get into this. Perhaps you missed that this isn't a problem solving list for latex209. But I will forget about this for the moment remembering the heated discussion last time. So far this was my ``hinted answer'' to Dominik but I thought that this information is of some interest to others too, so it went back to the list. I'm please to announce that doc.doc and docstrip.doc due to the efforts of David Love and Johannes Braams are about ready for distribution. This will then hopefully answers any remaining questions. The rest of this mail isn't any longer connected to Dominiks questions directly and is *not* meant to insult anybody. But I would like to remind everybody that asking questions on this list takes off from my already limited time. So please try also think that your contributions are necessary to make ltx3 happen. I have occasionly send out requests on this list for volunteer work but so far the reaction is very low. I know that is much easier to write a fast typed in answer to some topic then to spend say half a man/day on some specific task. The first is just done while ``anyway reading mail'' while the latter needs some ``additional free time''. In fact the overall time is perhaps about the same but one doesn't get this feeling. But we need our ``additional work'' so I would like to repeat some of the requests for work where we still look for people helping. - validating LaTeX 2.09: writing test files testing bugs that are supposed to be solved, testing interaction with environments and styles ... If anybody is interested I'm happy to provide him/her with the tools and the explicit procedures, they have also been outlined already on this list. Man/Time: between 1/2 to 4 days - .sty metacomments for smart editors: this was a request by David Love which I find important for editing support. Anybody interested in this should directly contact him under . As far as I know he got no response. Man/Time: probably 1/2 day over a longer period of time - playing around with \emergencystretch and writing up a summary: this wasn't requested before on this list, only in a side remark of some TUB article by me but I think this is an important area where the TeX community doesn't have enough experience so far, e.g. what are good values in what situations, why? what happens if.. and so on. I think this would also make a good article for TUB if one likes to give it the finishing touch afterwards. Man/Time: \approx 2 days plus 2 days for publication - making proposals for syntax: for example a counter proposal for the well thought out proposal for citation handling by David Rhead. It is certainly not necessary to be that elaborate with examples etc, but instead of saying I like this and I don't like that write up a short article with a real syntax proposal. Beside biblio stuff we asked for a proposal on index handling and support. Man/Time: 1/4 - 1 day for each proposal - math font handling: some time last year we started a discussion on how to handle math fonts under an enhanced release of nfss for ltx3. There have been a long and heated discussion that finally drifted off into areas that are far beyond the scope of the LaTeX3 project but the actual questions we've raised have never been answered. The only contribution that came close was the detailed suggestion and experience report by Sebastian Rahtz about the alpha release for an extended text font handling which has be send around by me. I most certainly hade hoped to get more reports on this, and still hope. Testing the test implementation and writing up detailed comments: Man/Time: 1/2 - 3/4 day Thinking about a proper math font handling taking into account the send around papers about this: Man/Time: 2 -4 days There have been more if you reread the list messages and for all I would welcome help still. This takes time, I know. But it is time that is ``planable'' I don't think my guesses above are far off. So I hope I still hope ... cheers Frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.ABDF1C44 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: doc.sty + small projects!

> I'm using newdoc.sty, and I've set = \MakeShortVerb{"} so that
> I can just say "\blahblah" to get my = verbatim stuff.  It's
> very convenient.

This is by the way an old suggestion by the very = person who wrote this
:-) By the way, one should say = \MakeShortVerb{\"} not just {"} this
may look a bit funny but that's the way it is. The = other form does
work most of the time but not always and may be = rejected by the next
release.

> But I run into trouble in moving arguments: = section titles
> and footnotes, and \protect doesn't seem to = help.

\verb never works inside an argument and it will also = not work if
masquerading as "...". This is a \TeX = limitation and will be probably
even be partly there in ltx3.

> Furthermore, the workaround using \bslash doesn't = work in
> footnotes: you get ``.

That's not tru \bslash only produces a `\' in the = current font, if the
font doesn't provide one in that position bad luck. = One needs to say
something like {\tt\bslash foo}, also = {\tt\string\foo} will work.


> I could probably answer this next one myself, = especially when
> doc.doc comes out.  But why is it that even = when I say
> \DisableCrossrefs, if I say \PageIndex I still = get a filename.idx
> file generated.  Am I missing = something?  Actually, couldn't we
> do without \Enable/\DisableCrossrefs, and just = have index
> generation turned on and off by = \Pageindex/\Codelineindex?

\Enable/\DisableCrossrefs only decide whether or not = crossreference
index entries are generated. A master index coming = from \begin{macro}
and \Describe... is always produces when one = uses
\Pageindex/\Codelineindex. Does this help?

> I have a sneaky feeling I'm missing something in = all this.
> (My marbles?)

Maybe we don't want to get into this. Perhaps you = missed that this
isn't a problem solving list for latex209. But I will = forget about
this for the moment remembering the heated discussion = last time.

So far this was my ``hinted answer'' to Dominik but I = thought that
this information is of some interest to others too, = so it went back to
the list. I'm please to announce that doc.doc and = docstrip.doc due to
the efforts of David Love and Johannes Braams are = about ready for
distribution. This will then hopefully answers any = remaining
questions.

The rest of this mail isn't any longer connected to = Dominiks questions
directly and is *not* meant to insult anybody.

But I would like to remind everybody that asking = questions on this
list takes off from my already limited time. So = please try also think
that your contributions are necessary to make ltx3 = happen. I have
occasionly send out requests on this list for = volunteer work but so
far the reaction is very low. I know that is much = easier to write a
fast typed in answer to some topic then to spend say = half a man/day on
some specific task. The first is just done while = ``anyway reading
mail'' while the latter needs some ``additional free = time''. In fact
the overall time is perhaps about the same but one = doesn't get this
feeling. But we need our ``additional work'' so I = would like to repeat
some of the requests for work where we still look for = people helping.

  - validating LaTeX 2.09: writing test files = testing bugs that are
supposed to be solved, testing interaction with = environments and
styles ... If anybody is interested I'm happy to = provide him/her with
the tools and the explicit procedures, they have also = been outlined
already on this list.

Man/Time: between 1/2 to 4 days


  - .sty metacomments for smart editors: this was = a request by David
Love which I find important for editing support. = Anybody interested in
this should directly contact him under = <d.love@daresbury.ac.uk>. As
far as I know he got no response.

Man/Time: probably 1/2 day over a longer period of = time


  - playing around with \emergencystretch and = writing up a summary:
this wasn't requested before on this list, only in a = side remark of
some TUB article by me but I think this is an = important area where the
TeX community doesn't have enough experience so far, = e.g. what are
good values in what situations, why? what happens = if.. and so on. I
think this would also make a good article for TUB if = one likes to give
it the finishing touch afterwards.

Man/Time: \approx 2 days plus 2 days for = publication


  - making proposals for syntax: for example a = counter proposal for
the well thought out proposal for citation handling = by David Rhead. It
is certainly not necessary to be that elaborate with = examples etc, but
instead of saying I like this and I don't like that = write up a short
article with a real syntax proposal. Beside biblio = stuff we asked for
a proposal on index handling and support.

Man/Time: 1/4 - 1 day for each proposal


  - math font handling: some time last year we = started a discussion on
how to handle math fonts under an enhanced release of = nfss for ltx3.
There have been a long and heated discussion that = finally drifted off
into areas that are far beyond the scope of the = LaTeX3 project but the
actual questions we've raised have never been = answered. The only
contribution that came close was the detailed = suggestion and
experience report by Sebastian Rahtz about the alpha = release for an
extended text font handling which has be send around = by me. I most
certainly hade hoped to get more reports on this, and = still hope.

Testing the test implementation and writing up = detailed comments:
Man/Time: 1/2 - 3/4 day

Thinking about a proper math font handling taking into = account the
send around papers about this:
Man/Time: 2 -4 days



There have been more if you reread the list messages = and for all I
would welcome help still. This takes time, I know. = But it is time that
is ``planable'' I don't think my guesses above are = far off.

So I hope I still hope ...


cheers Frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.ABDF1C44--