In one of the last posts I told you about my bohr package. In a comment the question came up how to draw Bohr models of atoms in an excited state. This made me thinking: should I improve the package adding support for this? And how should I do this regarding the syntax? As it is now the syntax does not easily allow to be extended for it. I can think of several approaches:
- Introduce a new command,
\exbohrsay, that would be used for excited states. This would give me full freedom of choice for a suited syntax.
- Introduce a starred variant
\bohr*for excited states. While I like this version thinking that excited states in chemistry are also marked with a star this would either limit my choices for a syntax or violate what is LaTeX practice: if I use a completely different syntax for the starred variant the
\bohrcommand wouldn’t follow most other LaTeX commands that have a starred variant.
\bohrcompletely new with a new syntax allowing both excited and non-excited states, switch package version from 0 to 1 and add a package option “compatibility” (or something) that allows for older documents still to be compiled correctly.