Received: from mx0.gmx.net (mx0.gmx.net [213.165.64.100]) by h1439878.stratoserver.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with SMTP id p0SNBCpR026297 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 00:11:13 +0100 Received: (qmail 28676 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2011 23:11:07 -0000 Delivered-To: GMX delivery to rainer.schoepf@gmx.net Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2011 23:11:06 -0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (EHLO relay2.uni-heidelberg.de) [129.206.210.211] by mx0.gmx.net (mx078) with SMTP; 29 Jan 2011 00:11:06 +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 p0SN9HxY009889 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 29 Jan 2011 00:09:18 +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 p0SN1Ml3012767; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 00:09:12 +0100 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with spool id 987150 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 00:09:12 +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 p0SN9BXB014135 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 00:09:11 +0100 Received: from mail-yi0-f49.google.com (mail-yi0-f49.google.com [209.85.218.49]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p0SN96t5010622 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 00:09:10 +0100 Received: by yib2 with SMTP id 2so1947059yib.22 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:09:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.212.8 with SMTP id k8mr5147432ybg.60.1296256145672; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:09:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.147.39.3 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:09:05 -0800 (PST) References: <4D4331D6.7050603@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Whitelist: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 18:09:05 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Bruno Le Floch Subject: Re: a question of style To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de In-Reply-To: <4D4331D6.7050603@gmx.de> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam); Detail=5D7Q89H36p4WX0t+AtsdW7Rkpq2CocXbjmEjLnML/Jh/D5PE3azF+tWbav9NfRPdBjN7A hu2kMqFTMtXwLrawGj72VauG7H+vnQAR+OuQR9OR0XCVwaIInzy4fEfJqoaNwHPgkYGDpJSbT4Wu eSUcQ==V1; X-Resent-By: Forwarder X-Resent-For: rainer.schoepf@gmx.net X-Resent-To: rainer@rainer-schoepf.de Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 6578 > As this is ment for document level, I am tempted to use > \NewDocumentCommand. But this word is longer than the whole code of the > macro itself, that blows some simple code really up. On the other hand, > using \def would be very short but is not LaTeX3-ish. \cs_new:Nn doesn't > let me define something without a : at the end. Or would a \tl_new be a > good way? I don't know what the right way of doing things is. Two ways I can think of are \cs_new:Npn \ie {i.\,e.} \tl_new:Nn \ie {i.\,e.} Bruno