I've updated this pull request to work with the latest master branch.

I like the change from \notes to \remarks and your rationale for the rest seems convincing (but it's @zygoloid that needs to be convinced.)

Are the only real "nesting bugs" that it fixes the ones in utilities.tex on remove_extent and remove_all_extents?

Here is a list of nesting errors that I found:

• overloading.tex:301: swap \end{itemize} and \end{note}
• utilities.tex:10052: missing \begin{example}
• utilities.tex:10062: missing \begin{example}
• locales.tex:247: swap \end{itemize} and \end{note}
• algorithms.tex:2419: swap \end{itemize} and \end{note}
• iostreams.tex:858: swap \end{itemize} and \end{note}

I like the idea of this change. I have just a couple of comments on the patch:

+\usepackage{xparse}
+\usepackage{textcase}

It seems like overkill to add extra packages for this; instead, please hardcode the capitalized and uncapitalized forms of note and example.

Can you split the \note(s) -> \remark(s) change out to a separate patch? I'd prefer to not have two notionally independent things done together (even if one depends on the other).

@zygoloid, I can write the note and example environments out so that they don't use the common underlying block environment. This will obviate the need for the xparse and textcase packages.

I can't, however split the \note → \remark change into a separate patch because the \begin{note} macro conflicts with the original \note macro. (Under the covers, \begin{note} gets expanded to \note.) Leaving \note defined as it originally was while using the new \begin{note} environment will cause errors if you try to compile the document.

I can't, however split the \note → \remark change into a separate patch because the \begin{note} macro conflicts with the original \note macro.

Can't you make a patch that only does the \note to \remark change, as a prerequisite to this one? Nothing conflicts with \remark, does it?

@zygoloid, yes, I can do that. Do you want it as a separate pull request or just separate commits?

Separate commits is fine. Thanks!

@zygoloid, okay, have a look now and see what you think.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I'm very happy with this going ahead; next steps are:

• rebase the patch onto master
• fix up any new occurrences that have occurred since the patch was first made
• one of myself, @jwakely, @burblebee, or @W-E-Brown needs to check that there are no changes here other than the intended ones and merge this change.

Thank you very much for pursuing this!

@zygoloid, sounds good. I'll rebase and update the patches soon. Thanks!

@zygoloid: Okay, this should be up to date again. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help!

CC: @jwakely, @burblebee, @W-E-Brown.

@zygoloid, @jwakely, @burblebee, @W-E-Brown: I've rebased so it should once again be a clean merge.

@zygoloid, @jwakely, @burblebee, @W-E-Brown: I've rebased so it should once again be a clean merge.

Ping to the reviewers. If this change is good, then it's worth seeing it through before it drifts away too much. A large change like this is hard to maintain over long periods of time.

Let me know whenever you decide you'd like to review/merge this pull request and I'll updated it to merge cleanly against HEAD.

If you can update this again I'll review it this week. Thanks.

@godbyk: Hi - could you please take another look?

Since this PR appears to have been abandoned, I pulled out the first of its two commits into the new PR #633.

I apologize for the delay on this. I didn't notice the comments on the pull request until just now. I'll update this shortly.

The new note and example environments take an optional argument to override the usual Note and Example text. For example,

\begin{note}
  This is a typical note.
\end{note}

\begin{note}[Note A]
  This note is labeled ``Note A.''
\end{note}

renders as:

[ Note: This is a typical note. — end note ]

[ Note A: This note is labeled “Note A.” — end note ]

@godbyk: This PR doesn't merge cleanly; could you please rebase again?

(Note that the first commit has now already been merged separately by #633.)

I've rebased it on master, the result is at jwakely@734b404

However there is some extra whitespace introduced after the new Note and Example environments are opened and closed, e.g.

@jwakely: I think that's acceptable. Having a fully puncutated Note inside an itemizing, running sentence is a typographical travesty as it stands, and space of no space are not going to make it any better. Neither style is worse than the other.

I don't think it's acceptable. I'm certainly not going to merge my branch to master like that, but if @zygoloid wants to that's his call.

The change revealed a number of other bugs though, such as [meta.trans.arr] using [\textit{Example} instead of \enterexample (and not even putting a colon after Example!)

Tables 20 and 55 look better too.

I'll rebase this on master and also look into correcting the spacing issue that @jwakely caught.

@godbyk: maybe hang on just a bit, I've already sent jwakely a fix for his fork of your branch, maybe we don't need to duplicate the work?

To fix the spacing, I removed the trailing \xspace macros from the note and example environments.

Closed in favor of #759.

Now merged - thanks for doing all the initial work on this.

@jwakely Thanks for working to get it merged in!