MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
            Thunderbird/38.2.0
Message-ID:  <55F91C84.80400@clear.net.nz>
Date:         Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:38:44 +1200
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: Andrew Parsloe <aparsloe@CLEAR.NET.NZ>
Subject: clist documentation
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
Precedence: list
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
Status: R

A small detail, but I think it would be helpful in the explanations of 
Section 3 of the l3clist package  to elevate sentences like " The <item> 
may not contain {, }, or # (assuming the usual TEX category codes 
apply)" from the TeXhackers notes to the larger type of the main body of 
the explanations. Particularly for \clist_remove_duplicates:N it's 
rather lost at the end of the TeXhackers note. This would bring it into 
line with the same proviso in the corresponding section of the l3tl 
documentation, where it is part of the main body of the explanation.

  Not being a TeX hacker, I had skipped over it in the clist material 
until just recently and was puzzled at unexpected results.

Andrew


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus