RE: [drew.adams@oracle.com: RE: Customize doc strings andtagstrings do not respect \\<...> and \\[...]]

["Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

    > Sure, that's OK too. But why not have it done implicitly?

    Would you like 'message' to do an implicit substitute-command-keys as
    well?

No.

    It is not a rhetorical question.

It's a good question.

    It doesn't seem intuitive to me that the value of :tag should be
    considered a documentation string.

Fair enough. It seemed natural to me, but I see your point. I guess I was
thinking of :tag strings the way I think of doc strings, since the role is
somewhat similar. Doc strings are generally not evaluated, however, so there
is no choice wrt them: substitute-command-keys must be built-in.

One difference between :tag and `message' is that you have to jump through a
few extra hoops to use substitute-command-keys with :tag (backquoting etc.).
Granted, that is only a minor difference.

I guess I'd say that things are OK as is. Perhaps we should just make sure
that the doc says that :tag values are evaluated (I imagine it does already
say that).