[latexrefman] \@startsection

[Vincent Belaïche]

Le 31/07/2017 à 13:12, Hefferon, James S. a écrit :
>>> In the English version I moved \@startsection to be under Sectioning.  Just seemed like that fit better.
>> I am not sure that this is a good idea. @ commands are supposed to be
> sort of commands for experts. Shouldn't we keep them apart as it was and
> place under Sectioning a forward reference to it.
>
> I guess that I don't take the @ to be that strong a statement.  I consider \@startsection to be a command that capable but not expert LaTeX users may easily use.  For example, it is described in Frank's _Companion_ at length.  I thought it is about sectioning so that location made sense to me.  Having commands placed by secretiveness seems less accessible, to me, but certainly I'd switch it back if others disagree.
>
> If we decide to keep it with @ then we should put a pointer in sectioning.

Yes, this what I suggested. Frankly speaking I am not that strongly 
opinionated.

>
>> Karl, what is your opinion ?
>
>> Let alone that when you change the document structure like that it makes
> it quite difficult for me to track the changes for the translation.
> Please be you that every time you change the structure you do not do any
> other change in the same revision.
>
> I apologize; I did not know that.  I don't want to make it hard.
No problem, next time please pay attention.
   V.
>
> Jim
>
> ----------------
> I must be permitted to say there could not be greater Regularity nor more cool determined Conduct shewn by Men, than by the Crew of the Speedy.
>     -- Lord Thomas Cochrane,  1801, May
>
> ________________________________________
> From: latexrefman [latexrefman-bounces at tug.org] on behalf of Vincent Belaïche [vincent.belaiche at gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:53
> To: latexrefman at tug.org
> Subject: Re: [latexrefman] \@startsection
>
> Comment below...
>
>
> Le 30/07/2017 à 18:10, Hefferon, James S. a écrit :
>> I translated \@ifstar.
>>
>> In the English version I moved \@startsection to be under Sectioning.  Just seemed like that fit better.
> I am not sure that this is a good idea. @ commands are supposed to be
> sort of commands for experts. Shouldn't we keep them apart as it was and
> place under Sectioning a forward reference to it.
>
> Karl, what is your opinion ?
>
> Let alone that when you change the document structure like that it makes
> it quite difficult for me to track the changes for the translation.
> Please be you that every time you change the structure you do not do any
> other change in the same revision.
>
> IMHO there should be some warning node under the \makeatletter &
> makeatother node telling about the @ commands, this node should be
> referred to at the beginning of any @-command node.
>
> Your example about \thesis at universityname seems to encourage hacking w/o
> any warning, we should reword that.  Here is the wanting
>
> 1) you are not supposed to change the definition of a private command
> within a package, this is hacking, so there might be consequence like
>       - incompatibility with some LaTeX tools like TeX4ht or Hevea
>       - non-futureproofness
> 2) If you define commands using macros2e @-commands in the preamble,
> this means that you are beginning to do fancy things, please consider
> making your commands re-usable for other documents and placing them in
> your own package.
>
>     V.
>> Jim
>>
>> ----------------
>> I must be permitted to say there could not be greater Regularity nor more cool determined Conduct shewn by Men, than by the Crew of the Speedy.
>>      -- Lord Thomas Cochrane,  1801, May
>>
>
> ---
> L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>