MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAM2dePV5k2+Q+H=jCj=bsvc-hWanc3_CLYw1-ukhB8UMhzU_Lw@mail.gmail.com> <51C94FA0.1080803@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePUfzF_Bj5QX7qbAmsyO7Udjy1yb5j43zTVexOwG2rmtVQ@mail.gmail.com> <51DD0EBD.6080308@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePUxFs1eNU1iTCrnp=CbDFo1eMjE813gZQH3vVhBkH=zDg@mail.gmail.com> <51DF2000.30703@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePW67rUcSRqRYEeccS6AUVmGjW5XuY74ZCYPfgqObK=BcA@mail.gmail.com> <51E12031.4060600@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePUp90ehRiipJF+mHVZUYksVbrbP7gKS=zJvdJyCD8JSjQ@mail.gmail.com>
            <51E2FFC0.6010209@morningstar2.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Message-ID:  <CAM2dePVY9XSqG4W4VbP6V4mrO5_67t7=VfGnENrdcpz5NsVyig@mail.gmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 15 Jul 2013 00:55:01 -0400
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: Jura Pintar <pintar@POST.HARVARD.EDU>
Subject: Re: l3keys feature request
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <51E2FFC0.6010209@morningstar2.co.uk>
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
Status: R

> For the moment I've gone with my simpler separation of 'keys which have
> been set' and 'keys which have not'. I've yet to write the docs, which
> may reveal issues, but my thinking currently is that key filtering is a
> way to assign only some keys in particular contexts, but that elsewhere
> either the 'balance' will be set or all keys will be set

Fair enough. I'm more than happy with the last version! :)

How would you feel about also adding Fitler/Groups versions of
\ProcessKeysOptions and \ProcessKeysPackageOptions to l3keys2e?

There's a typo in row 291 of l3keys.dtx (should be '\enquote' in place
of '\enquoe=92).

Beyond that, I just want to thank you for all your patience and effort pu=
t in!

Best,

Jura