Re: [RFR] templates://auctex/{auctex/templates}

[Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>]

Justin B Rye <jbr@edlug.org.uk> wrote:

> Christian Perrier wrote:
>> I slightly reworked your proposal to fit some style recommendations
>> (no sentence in synopsis, no double spaces, avoid "you"). That gives:
>> 
>> Package: preview-latex-style
> [...]
>>  The purpose of the preview package is the extraction of selected
>
> Since this is a Debian package description (explaining the purpose
> of preview-latex-style*.deb) it needs to be clear that preview isn't
> a package in that sense. 
>
>    The purpose of the preview LaTeX package is the extraction of selected

Good point; s/preview LaTeX package/preview.sty would be even shorter
and conveys essentially the same message.

>>  Current uses of the package include the preview-latex package for
>>  WYSIWYG functionality in the AUCTeX editing environment, generation of
>>  previews in LyX, as part of the operation of the ps4pdf and pst-pdf
>>  packages, the tbook XML system and some other tools.
>
> Wait, is that saying "Current uses of the preview-latex-style Debian
> package include the preview-latex LaTeX package (and some other
> things)"?  What if anything is the difference between preview and
> preview-latex?

No, it wants to say "Current uses of preview.sty include the
preview-latex Emacs 'package' for WYSIWYG functionality in the AUCTeX
editing environment for Emacs". 

I suggest to change it to 

   Currently, preview.sty is used by preview-latex, the WYSIWYG component
   of the AUCTeX editing environment, for generation of previews in LyX, as
   part of the operation of the ps4pdf and pst-pdf LaTeX packages, by the
   tbook XML system and some other tools.

Note that the old phrasing says "Current uses of ... include $foo, $bar,
as part of the operation of ..., $baz" which doesn't sound like proper
english; I've tried to fix that.

> It's clear enough that ps4pdf etc are LaTeX rather than Debian
> packages, but looking up ps4pdf on CTAN I see it's deprecated in
> favour of pst-pdf.  Any danger of text going out of date? 

Yes, in about 5 to 10 years, extrapolating how fast other LaTeX packages
get out of use. I suggest to keep it in as long as upstream has it.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)