Message-Id: <199401311250.AA10653@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
Date:         Mon, 31 Jan 1994 12:45:15 LCL
From: Mike Piff <M.Piff@sheffield.ac.uk>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: form and content
Status: R

From: Joachim Schrod <schrod@ITI.INFORMATIK.TH-DARMSTADT.DE>
%>> One problem with LaTeX is that it is not consistent in the way commands and
%>> environments are used. Thus one says \begin{enumerate}, but not
 \begin{item},
%>> and not \begin{section}.
%>
%>
%>The section and item environments *exist* right *now*, in classic,
%>pure LaTeX 2.09, and also in the new LaTeX2e.

Now that *was* a revelation, although if I had thought about the macros
enough I would have seen it. Now why did Lamport not mention this in his
manual?  Was this intentional, or an oversight in the way the macros were
defined?  So the existence of the command \foo implies the existence of the
environment foo.

Mike
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% Dr M J Piff, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of %%
%% Sheffield, UK.                    e-mail: M.Piff@sheffield.ac.uk %%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%