Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:22:09 +0200 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n88EMArB003855 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:22:10 +0200 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 n88EFQgt010926 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:15:26 +0200 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 n88Cn5dm022031; Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:15:25 +0200 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with spool id 305985 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:15:25 +0200 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (relay2.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.210.211]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n88EFPNY018136 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:15:25 +0200 Received: from mta2.cl.cam.ac.uk (mta2.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.0.14]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n88EFAjS010160 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2009 16:15:14 +0200 Received: from slogin-serv3.cl.cam.ac.uk ([128.232.0.74] helo=cl.cam.ac.uk) by mta2.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.092 #1) id 1Ml1TT-000675-00 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:15:11 +0100 X-Mailer: MH-E 8.0.3; nmh 1.3; GNU Emacs 22.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de id n88EFPNY018137 Message-ID: <20754.1252419310@cl.cam.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 15:15:10 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Robin Fairbairns Subject: Re: l3doc, was Re: xparse To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:12:17 +0200. <5.1.0.14.0.20090908150936.03045ec0@pop3.web.de> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-ProteoSys-SPAM-Score: -6.599 () BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.65 on 213.139.130.197 Return-Path: owner-latex-l@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Sep 2009 14:22:09.0913 (UTC) FILETIME=[C05B0E90:01CA308F] Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 6094 Uwe Lück wrote: > >Well, I don't like this very much: I prefer package code to be the primary > >content and documentation to be extracted from comments. I find it much easier > > for changing the code and testing it without needing ot extract it > > first. (Same > >problem as dtx.) > > I understand and agree. i don't mind dtx, particularly (i've been writing it for >15 years, and my fingers wander to the necessary groove without prompting). however, there are quite a few (significant) packages on ctan that have lots of documentation as comments only. if i could take one such and produce a useful printable document, i could improve the quality of user support quite a bit. (i've dallied with editing the comments into a separate .tex file. this works, but is time-consuming, and tempts one into editorial work.) robin (straying off-topic for the group. again.)