User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <48C8AB2F.8020307@morningstar2.co.uk>
Date:         Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:22:55 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
From: Joseph Wright <joseph.wright@MORNINGSTAR2.CO.UK>
Subject: Module names
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
Precedence: list
Status: R

Hello all,

I've been thinking about module names.  The current situation with
LaTeX2e is that you take a guess at an internal prefix, based (perhaps)
on a quick CTAN search of the package names currently in use.  Usually
effective, but could be improved.

I think it would be a good idea if the documentation said something
about this.  I'd suggest that a list of all of the kernel prefixes would
be useful in one place, plus a statement that all single letter prefixes
are to be used only for variable descriptions (c_, l_, g_, etc.).  I'd
also suggest making "private_" a module prefix which can be used for
non-public material only.

To get something like a formalised system for modules in general, a
simple list of modules would probably suffice.  I wonder if the CTAN
team might be able to ask for this information when packages are
uploaded (i.e. add "Module name (LaTeX3 packages)" to the current list
of questions). This might then simply be added to a webpage or the
database they have.  The later would need some kind of search, and I
have no idea how easy that might be!

Does this even sound worthwhile to others?
-- 
Joseph Wright