IN the end, it was a bit of an anti-climax.

Although we had been waiting for the Scottish Government's revised thoughts on the economy, currency and a post-Brexit border with England for aeons, the latest instalment of Nicola Sturgeon's independence prospectus was big on rhetoric but light on detail.

In part, that reflects a shift away from the style of the White Paper which she and Alex Salmond published in November 2013, which had numbers and promises galore in it, many of which failed to stand the test of time.

That was also when a vote agreed with Westminster was 10 months away.

Now, although the First Minister has said she hopes to have Indyref2 next October, few are holding their breath.

So rather than putting a lot of perishable goods into her new prospectus, Ms Sturgeon kept it flexible. Or vague, if you prefer.

There wasn't even a single page balance sheet setting out the public finances in year one outside the UK.

In addition, it reflected the joint government with the Scottish Greens, whose policies on tax and growth don't always align with the SNP's.

The Greens would never have agreed to the White Paper's championing of oil and gas extraction or its plans to cut corporation tax and abolish air passenger duty, for instance.

So this co-produced prospectus has had to put harmony ahead of detail.

The downside is a lot of gaps. On currency, for instance, the Greens want a Scottish one pronto, while the SNP are content to keep sterling for a while.

The result is a plan to have a new currency "as soon as practicable", once new institutions are created and win over the financial markets, with the timing based on a series of economic tests and Holyrood's approval.

Ms Sturgeon refused to say how long, at a minimum, this would take.

That in turn meant she was unable to say how long it would take Scotland to get back into the EU, as a new currency is a pre-condition of joining, even though rejoining is at the heart of her plans to boost the economy.

Pushed, she said she hoped it would be within five years, but given the many steps involved it was unconvincing.

While on borders, she said that some sort of "technology" would help minimise disruption to trade created by Scotland being in the EU and England still being out because of Brexit.

What technology exactly? she was asked. She said she would get back to us in another instalment of the series.

Although the question mark hanging over the timing of the currency, and hence the timing of EU membership, means it would be hard to prioritise spending on technology that could be getting dated before it is ever used.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies also pointed out the lack of detail on tax and spending yesterday, suggesting the former would rise and the latter fall in the early years of independence because of Scotland's (omitted) starting deficit.

It noted drily that: "Experience from recent weeks suggests the markets may not look favourably on fiscal plans built on the uncertain hope of a substantial future boost to growth."

The Fraser of Allander Institute thinktank was more generous, praising the Government for starting to lay out some work, despite leaving "some of the most difficult questions unanswered".

However economic uncertainty was "not an excuse" for failing to estimate that crucial starting deficit.

All in all, it is hard to see yesterday's paper moving the dial on independence and persuading the unpersuaded.

True, as the FM said, the chaos at Westminster could make independence a more attractive alternative to people.

But voters may also be more wary of politicians bearing grand economic plans. They know the markets won't cut a new Scotland any slack.