MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <4DCA93CC.5020605@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <19920.15087.714131.100464@morse.mittelbach-online.de>
            <447088.31292.qm@web24704.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
            <BANLkTinwYoQLJzWWfq0E47OJi-V3+8kQTQ@mail.gmail.com>
            <4DD0BFB3.7070007@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <27DAD3FD-9C28-4707-9454-FBB65B66A56D@gmail.com>
            <4DD0D8F4.7030101@morningstar2.co.uk>
Message-ID:  <19921.39693.383979.872806@morse.mittelbach-online.de>
Date:         Mon, 16 May 2011 23:45:49 +0200
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: Frank Mittelbach <frank.mittelbach@LATEX-PROJECT.ORG>
Subject: Re: xparse and space skipping
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
In-Reply-To:  <4DD0D8F4.7030101@morningstar2.co.uk>
Precedence: list
Status: R

Joseph Wright writes:

 > As I said in my other mail, at the moment xparse is about LaTeX2e
 > conventions using LaTeX3 ideas. So there is no danger of dropping
 > trailing optional arguments at the moment! I'd also note that there is
 > an outstanding question on the coffin code about whether optional
 > arguments, a keyval approach or something in between is best.

yeah there is :-) I'm dead against it .. no not really. But I'm not really in
favor of it either. But not here under this subject line

 > So I certainly don't regard this question as resolved one way or the other
 > at present: at the moment, I'm just worried about spaces :-)

very wise. :-))