Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:34:30 +0100 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n022XxIh010621 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:34:00 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.94]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n022Uj3V000554 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:30:45 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n01N1BSq026899; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:30:30 +0100 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with spool id 196575 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:30:29 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n022UTmv012373 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:30:29 +0100 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rv-out-0708.google.com [209.85.198.240]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n022UOod000834 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 03:30:27 +0100 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c5so6949016rvf.10 for ; Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:30:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.172.6 with SMTP id z6mr3926041rvo.0.1230863423575; Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:30:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?10.0.1.100? (219-90-149-126.ip.adam.com.au [219.90.149.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f42sm19623543rvb.8.2009.01.01.18.30.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:30:10 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) References: <308a1ed10901010155r78f82ab3v11fef8d4a776813b@mail.gmail.com> <308a1ed10901010725t35e1c160m6e361d43655b3cb1@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2) X-Spam-Whitelist: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 13:00:06 +1030 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Will Robertson Subject: Re: A Question about the future of LaTeX3 To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE In-Reply-To: <308a1ed10901010725t35e1c160m6e361d43655b3cb1@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-ProteoSys-SPAM-Score: -2.599 () BAYES_00 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 213.139.130.197 Return-Path: owner-latex-l@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jan 2009 02:34:30.0207 (UTC) FILETIME=[A38A54F0:01C96C82] Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5564 On 02/01/2009, at 1:55 AM, VAFA KHALIGHI wrote: > Thanks for this. I am more than happy to support bidirectional > typesetting in LaTeX3, so it seems that I need to start when you > almost have finished the coding. Is there any official way that > someone can join LaTeX3 project? I mean I would like to join the > project to add features for bidirectional typesetting support. The best thing that you can do right now is to look at the expl3 code and how that fits into what you have in mind. We're in the middle of changing some things around, so things certainly aren't stable right now. But the underlying philosophy is correct and you'll be able to get a good feel for how the programming layer works. > On the other hand, there is a problem with contributed packages in > LaTeX2e. A package that is written by X, would include a command > where its name is already used in the other package and if the user > uses these two packages, then he will be experienceing such > problems. Is there any plan that in LaTeX3, we can control > contributed packages to avoid such problems? There is a more formal mechanism to name package variables/functions according to a standard naming scheme. For example, in the expl3 code the functions are split into separate modules, each which takes a standard prefix: \clist_map_inline:nn \bool_if:nTF \int_abs:n and so on. New packages/modules will take their own prefix in the same way that LaTeX package authors use things like \zf@ as a prefix to separate their internal functions and avoid clashes. Without namespacing in TeX, this is the best we can do -- the problem will never be eliminated but it shouldn't be much of a problem. Even now I find it's very rare to run into problems. Hope this helps, Will