Message-Id: <199402142054.AA03798@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
In-Reply-To:  <9402141846.AA00959@ftp.tex.ac.uk>
Date:         Mon, 14 Feb 1994 20:45:07 GMT
From: Sebastian Rahtz <spqr@FTP.TEX.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: collective documents [was exam papers]
Status: R

Barbara's `collective' setup is interesting. I dont at all like the
redefinition of \documentclass etc, and \end{document}, so that
articles run separately. whats wrong with the \include mechanism?
(yes, i know whats wrong with it, but an enhanced version). I'd
suggest that this is the way to attack the problem, since half the
work is done already. add a `paper' environment to include eahc paper,
and you are away.

My moral is that I think LaTeX3 should look at \include and
considerably tart it up, and this would help a lot

Sebastian