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>
            <CAM2dePVY9XSqG4W4VbP6V4mrO5_67t7=VfGnENrdcpz5NsVyig@mail.gmail.com> <51E5AD8C.1020405@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <loom.20130717T201125-747@post.gmane.org>
            <51E7A12D.7040700@morningstar2.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <A4957F2D-FEF8-47AE-9FD2-2E8511CBA451@yahoo.co.uk>
Date:         Thu, 18 Jul 2013 15:56:18 +0100
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: Chris Rowley <ca_rowley@YAHOO.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Time for \UseExplPackage? (Was re: l3keys feature request)
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <51E7A12D.7040700@morningstar2.co.uk>
Precedence: list
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
Status: R

Joseph

>>  Until we actually have the basics of a new format, 

A new format???

That sounds worrying as I am passing the message to the million+ everyday users of LaTeX that there will never again be a need for different 'formats' with all its technical and sociological problems, primarily because they are handy only for last century's technology levels.

So I hope we can have a consistent message on this.

Chris
 

Sent from a bar . . . maybe an iBar.

On 18 Jul 2013, at 09:02, Joseph Wright <joseph.wright@MORNINGSTAR2.CO.UK> wrote:

> On 17/07/2013 19:27, Joel C. Salomon wrote:
>> Joseph Wright <joseph.wright@...> writes:
>>> At present I'm waiting to see what people thing of the code-level stuff.
>>> At the same time, I'm not sure about making package option processing
>>> too complex. The lesson I've learned is that keyval in options is
>>> governed by the LaTeX2e kernel: options are expanded, and checking for
>>> clashes doesn't 'know' about keyval. Thus I tend to think load-time
>>> options should really be limited to things that need to happen there,
>>> with later \<thing>setup to cover more complex option sets.
>> 
>> Is the behavior of package & class options expected to be different 
>> (specifically, keyval-aware) in a LaTeX3 kernel?  If so, would it be 
>> appropriate to define \UseExplPackage et al. so that the future behavior can 
>> be experimented with?
>> 
>> --Joel
> 
> Not really worthwhile. The way that the LaTeX2e kernel does option
> processing means that expansion/space stripping happens 'early'. As
> such, you can't alter it in a way that is easy. Look at the option
> keyval-patching code in xkeyval and kvoptions to see this: you have to
> pre-load an additional package before the one where you want 'new'
> effects. Until we actually have the basics of a new format, this isn't
> going to help.
> -- 
> Joseph Wright