X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1713" "Thu" "10" "February" "1994" "09:25:02" "LCL" "Mike Piff" "M.Piff@sheffield.ac.uk" "<199402100929.AA14174@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de>" "44" "Re: A philosophical question about packages and options" "^Date:" nil nil "2" "1994021009:25:02" "A philosophical question about packages and options" nil nil]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/24.6.93) id AA12190; Thu, 10 Feb 94 10:30:52 +0100 Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0-sc/03.06.93) id AA28978; Thu, 10 Feb 94 10:29:51 +0100 Received: from tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de with SMTP id AA14174 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4(mail.m4[1.12]) for <@MAIL.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE:Schoepf@SC.ZIB-BERLIN.DE>); Thu, 10 Feb 1994 10:29:45 +0100 Message-Id: <199402100929.AA14174@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de> Received: from TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE by tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2411; Thu, 10 Feb 94 10:29:34 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (NJE origin MAILER@DHDURZ1) by TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2410; Thu, 10 Feb 1994 10:29:35 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (NJE origin LISTSERV@DHDURZ1) by VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9049; Thu, 10 Feb 1994 10:29:02 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Thu, 10 Feb 1994 09:25:02 LCL From: Mike Piff Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: A philosophical question about packages and options Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1504 From: David Carlisle %> %>> ... \documentclass[option=value]{article} .... %> %>key = value syntax is generally quite nice for optional arguments. %>However, I can only repeat the guiding principles of the upgrade to %>2e, as stated in the original announcement: %> %> * Unmodified version 2.09 document files can be processed with %> LaTeX2e. %> %> * All new features of LaTeX2e conform to the conventions of version %> 2.09, making it as easy as possible for current users to learn to %> use them. %> %>key=value is definitely not a standard convention of 2.09. %> I don't follow this argument. \documentstyle can keep its old syntax, but \documentclass is outside LaTeX209 and can do what it likes. Similarly \...package... commands are entirely new. This distinction between a document class, a package and an option seems a spurious one, anyway. I for one haven't the foggiest notion what is what. I should have thought that a4 was a package to set the paper area, that article was a package to set the layout, that 12pt was a package to set the base font size, that times was a package to set the font, that .... Surely these functions ought to be done orthogonally. Indeed, article is far too big a portmanteau to survive undivided, and should just be a series of packages \usepackage{setsectioningcommands} \usepackage{setlistcommands} ..... Mike Piff %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %% Dr M J Piff, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of %% %% Sheffield, UK. e-mail: M.Piff@sheffield.ac.uk %% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%