Am 03.03.2011 um 19:18 schrieb Aditya Mahajan:
\usemodule[annotation]
A very useful module to have! But how is it different from enumerations (apart from having a modern interface)? in particular, would you consider reimplimenting definitions and enumerations by using annotations as a base?
That’s only one way what you can use the module for. The main purpose are todo lists etc., e.g. \defineannotation[todo] \starttext \todo{Add a table} \stoptext And later you can remove all remaining \todo texts with \setupannotation[todo][alternative=none]
I am a bit surprised by the naming of the internal macros:
annotation_cmd annotation__cmd annotation___cmd
I liked the LaTeX3 system to have names in the form \<module>_<command>, with this you have a easy way to protect internal commands and to avoid command clashes, e.g. you define the command \getfirstcharacter in your filter module but this name is already used in the core (syst-aux.mkiv) and with the name \filter_getfirstcharacter you can avoid this without thinking too much about a good name.
I know that \do \dodo \dododo is not the best notation, but I don't find _ __ ___ better.
I don’t like the __ and ___ either but do you know a better way for good names without using do, dodo, nodo, yes or nop? I first thought about this: \def\module_command {\dosingleempty\module_docommand} \def\module_docommand[#1]{} but i don’t liked it and in the end i use now this: \def\module_command {\dosingleempty\module__command} \def\module__command[#1]{} Wolfgang