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 p7TGkI0x028187 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:46:19 +0200 Received: (qmail 15432 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2011 16:46:13 -0000 Delivered-To: GMX delivery to rainer.schoepf@gmx.net Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2011 16:46:13 -0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (EHLO relay2.uni-heidelberg.de) [129.206.210.211] by mx0.gmx.net (mx104) with SMTP; 29 Aug 2011 18:46:13 +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 p7TGiKCX007524 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:20 +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 p7TElncg006217; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:19 +0200 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with spool id 1612374 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:19 +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 p7TGiJsQ032004 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:19 +0200 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (cyrus-portal.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.176]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7TGiJYk007511 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:19 +0200 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7TGiIWY008605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:18 +0200 Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p7TGi6Vf008950 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:10 +0200 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qy4wM-0008MT-KM for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:02 +0200 Received: from p5dd1d0ea.dip.t-dialin.net ([93.209.208.234]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:02 +0200 Received: from news3 by p5dd1d0ea.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:44:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Lines: 54 References: <4E5B6BF7.80208@morningstar2.co.uk> <4E5BA7FC.8060705@latex-project.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p5dd1d0ea.dip.t-dialin.net User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.41de X-Spam-Flag: No X-Envelope-From: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.40 required=5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,L_P0F_Linux,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:43:05 +0200 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Ulrike Fischer Subject: Re: missing or unclear concept documentation To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (eXpurgate); Detail=5D7Q89H36p5x1RWm4Ldx8s9yiUs4bd0iUKtVgF9sToUsUrO/rWHIXCaX80EPtnlVA3GnM td+ry2JLafCDw+fHMyahFo5SWPHEEkQluUOj/b89vtx4vG8eWWDLEQeltBzVDl3wQP7zqC5Qc84k 4qnHv9U3JteuwTcIN55zinAp/XvkxSozP702z3GN1YNHZvCWddhOPoOdSQ=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: 6844 Am Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:53:48 +0200 schrieb Frank Mittelbach: >> (I'm starting to like expl3 quite a lot. > > that's great, a lot of blood sweat and tears went into it (and some > people can tell you :-) ) >> But I'm still unsure about >> the concrete meaning of some concepts, this make it a bit difficult >> to decide in which part of the documentation to look for something. > any identification of such parts you feel unsure about would be helpful > I guess. Might be difficult to articulate, but please try. Well here some remarks. Please take into account that I didn't read the documentation from begin to end but simply searched with the help of the toc. In most cases imho a simple example would help a lot (I solved quite a lot problems by looking in existings sty like siunitx and fontspec). 1. The first three paragraphs of l3tl: "token list variable" versus "arbitrary token list". "list of items" versus "list of tokens" 2. Packages l3prop, l3keys, l3keyval: What is their relation? 3. l3seq. What is an sequence compared to a token list? 4. The introduction makes a difference between "functions" and "variables" but doesn't say which package(s) deal with the one and which with the other type. It would also help if there were a rule of thump when a command without argument should be better defined as a function and when as variable. 5. In the clist package I was quite bewildered because they didn't seem to be a command to actually *fill* a list. At the end I found that I can add more than one item with \clist_put_left:Nn. > Joseph is making quite some effort to improve on the overall > documentation but we are well aware that documentation of certain > general concepts is effectively missing or bad and I'm sure some > concepts we take for granted (having worked with it for quite a while) > may not at all be obvious to new users Well every documentation can be improved. There are errors in source3.pdf and there are things missing. But nevertheless at my opinion the documentation if fantastic. Everytime that I had to look in the conTeXt code I wish they would offer at least 10% of the code documentation that is done by the latex team. -- Ulrike Fischer