Re: [NTG-context] Wrong prefix in cross references to formulas in external document
Dear Hans,
Thank you for the nice and straightforward solution. I have tested it
locally and it works. I hope it will be in the next release (should I do
anything?).
By the way, I have a couple of other small issues. I will describe them in
detail in other threads of this mailing list if it is the right place to do
so.
Best regards,
Yaroslav
пн, 30 янв. 2023 г. в 12:52, Hans Hagen via ntg-context :
> On 1/29/2023 5:03 PM, Yaroslav Beltukov via ntg-context wrote:
> > Dear Hans and all contributors,
> >
> > I really appreciate ConTeXt for the right way to obtain high quality
> > documents. I'm a theoretical physicist and I'm going to write a book. I
> > think ConTeXt is the right choice to work with a number of formulas,
> > figures and cross-references. The visual quality of formulas is better
> > than in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula autosplitting looks
> > also very promising. For me it is important to obtain the high quality
> > without a lot of manual tweaks of each formula for each given document
> > format and figure placement.
> >
> > However, I have found a problem with references if I compile one
> > component only. The references to formulas in other components have
> > wrong prefixes, e.g. (2.1) instead of (3.1). Needless to say, the right
> > formula references are very important.
> >
> > I started looking into this issue. The references to other components
> > are taken from the whole product as from an external document. It turned
> > out that this is a general problem with references with prefixes to
> > external documents. The prefix is stored in a tuc file as a reference to
> > a section as a sequential number of the header in the document. As a
> > result, the prefix from the external document is calculated using the
> > structure of the current document.
> >
> > Here is the MWE, which consists of two files:
> > foo.tex:
> >
> > \defineenumeration[remark][prefix=yes, prefixsegments=chapter:section]
> >
> > \starttext
> >
> > Equations: \in[eq1], \in[eq2], \in[eq3], \in[eq4]
> >
> > Sections: \in[sec1], \in[sec2], \in[sec3], \in[sec4]
> >
> > Chapters: \in[chap1], \in[chap2], \in[chap3], \in[chap4]
> >
> > Remarks: \in[remark1], \in[remark2]
> >
> > \startbodymatter
> >
> > \chapter[chap1]{Chapter}
> > \placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> > \chapter[chap2]{Chapter}
> > \section[sec1]{Section}
> > \section[sec2]{Section}
> > \placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> > \placeformula[eq2]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> >
> > \stopbodymatter
> >
> > \startappendices
> >
> > \chapter[chap3]{Chapter}
> > \section[sec3]{Section}
> > \placeformula[eq3]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> > \section[sec4]{Section}
> > \startremark[remark1]\stopremark
> > \placeformula[eq4]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> > \startremark[remark2]\stopremark
> > \chapter[chap4]{Chapter}
> >
> > \stopappendices
> >
> > \stoptext
> >
> >
> > bar.tex:
> >
> > \starttext
> >
> > Equations: \in[foo::eq1], \in[foo::eq2], \in[foo::eq3], \in[foo::eq4]
> >
> > Sections: \in[foo::sec1], \in[foo::sec2], \in[foo::sec3], \in[foo::sec4]
> >
> > Chapters: \in[foo::chap1], \in[foo::chap2], \in[foo::chap3],
> \in[foo::chap4]
> >
> > Remarks: \in[foo::remark1], \in[foo::remark2]
> >
> > % any chapters and sections here
> >
> > \stoptext
> >
> > It is expected to have the same first page on these documents:
> >
> > Equations: 1.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
> > Sections: 2.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
> > Chapters: 1, 2, A, B
> > Remarks: A.2.1, A.2.2
> >
> > However, the bar.tex produces wrong prefixes to formulas and remarks.
> > The output depends on the document structure of bar.tex, not foo.tex.
> >
> > I started looking into the source code. Thanks to lua, it is not a big
> > deal to track the problem. The prefixdata is complemented by the
> > sectiondata after the loading the tuc file. So, the question is: is it
> > possible to store the full prefixdata with all necessary prefix numbers
> > in the tuc file? Here is my proposal to change the source code:
> >
> > --- strc-lst-old.lmt2023-01-29 11:30:15.610309948 +0300
> > +++ strc-lst.lmt2023-01-29 12:10:08.864228923 +0300
> > @@ -266,6 +266,16 @@
> > if r and not r.section then
> > r.section = structures.sections.currentid()
> > end
> > +-- store sectiondata in prefixdata (necessary for external files)
> > +if t.prefixdata and r.section then
> > +local sectiondata = structures.sections.collected[r.section]
> > +if sectiondata then
> > +for k, v in next, sectiondata do
> > +t.prefixdata[k] = v
> > +end
> > +end
> > +end
> > +--
> > local b = r and t.block
> > if r and not b then
> > local s = r.section
> >
> > --- strc-ref-old.lmt2023-01-29 11:30:15.823643904 +0300
> > +++ strc-ref.lmt2023-01-29 12:07:45.697109862 +0300
> > @@ -2318,7 +2318,17 @@
> > if data then
> > numberdata = lists.reordered(data)
Re: [NTG-context] Wrong prefix in cross references to formulas in external document
On 1/29/2023 5:03 PM, Yaroslav Beltukov via ntg-context wrote:
Dear Hans and all contributors,
I really appreciate ConTeXt for the right way to obtain high quality
documents. I'm a theoretical physicist and I'm going to write a book. I
think ConTeXt is the right choice to work with a number of formulas,
figures and cross-references. The visual quality of formulas is better
than in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula autosplitting looks
also very promising. For me it is important to obtain the high quality
without a lot of manual tweaks of each formula for each given document
format and figure placement.
However, I have found a problem with references if I compile one
component only. The references to formulas in other components have
wrong prefixes, e.g. (2.1) instead of (3.1). Needless to say, the right
formula references are very important.
I started looking into this issue. The references to other components
are taken from the whole product as from an external document. It turned
out that this is a general problem with references with prefixes to
external documents. The prefix is stored in a tuc file as a reference to
a section as a sequential number of the header in the document. As a
result, the prefix from the external document is calculated using the
structure of the current document.
Here is the MWE, which consists of two files:
foo.tex:
\defineenumeration[remark][prefix=yes, prefixsegments=chapter:section]
\starttext
Equations: \in[eq1], \in[eq2], \in[eq3], \in[eq4]
Sections: \in[sec1], \in[sec2], \in[sec3], \in[sec4]
Chapters: \in[chap1], \in[chap2], \in[chap3], \in[chap4]
Remarks: \in[remark1], \in[remark2]
\startbodymatter
\chapter[chap1]{Chapter}
\placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\chapter[chap2]{Chapter}
\section[sec1]{Section}
\section[sec2]{Section}
\placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\placeformula[eq2]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\stopbodymatter
\startappendices
\chapter[chap3]{Chapter}
\section[sec3]{Section}
\placeformula[eq3]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\section[sec4]{Section}
\startremark[remark1]\stopremark
\placeformula[eq4]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\startremark[remark2]\stopremark
\chapter[chap4]{Chapter}
\stopappendices
\stoptext
bar.tex:
\starttext
Equations: \in[foo::eq1], \in[foo::eq2], \in[foo::eq3], \in[foo::eq4]
Sections: \in[foo::sec1], \in[foo::sec2], \in[foo::sec3], \in[foo::sec4]
Chapters: \in[foo::chap1], \in[foo::chap2], \in[foo::chap3], \in[foo::chap4]
Remarks: \in[foo::remark1], \in[foo::remark2]
% any chapters and sections here
\stoptext
It is expected to have the same first page on these documents:
Equations: 1.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
Sections: 2.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
Chapters: 1, 2, A, B
Remarks: A.2.1, A.2.2
However, the bar.tex produces wrong prefixes to formulas and remarks.
The output depends on the document structure of bar.tex, not foo.tex.
I started looking into the source code. Thanks to lua, it is not a big
deal to track the problem. The prefixdata is complemented by the
sectiondata after the loading the tuc file. So, the question is: is it
possible to store the full prefixdata with all necessary prefix numbers
in the tuc file? Here is my proposal to change the source code:
--- strc-lst-old.lmt 2023-01-29 11:30:15.610309948 +0300
+++ strc-lst.lmt 2023-01-29 12:10:08.864228923 +0300
@@ -266,6 +266,16 @@
if r and not r.section then
r.section = structures.sections.currentid()
end
+ -- store sectiondata in prefixdata (necessary for external files)
+ if t.prefixdata and r.section then
+ local sectiondata = structures.sections.collected[r.section]
+ if sectiondata then
+ for k, v in next, sectiondata do
+ t.prefixdata[k] = v
+ end
+ end
+ end
+ --
local b = r and t.block
if r and not b then
local s = r.section
--- strc-ref-old.lmt 2023-01-29 11:30:15.823643904 +0300
+++ strc-ref.lmt 2023-01-29 12:07:45.697109862 +0300
@@ -2318,7 +2318,17 @@
if data then
numberdata = lists.reordered(data) -- data.numberdata
if numberdata then
- helpers.prefix(data,prefixspec)
+ -- helpers.prefix(data,prefixspec)
+ -- use the actual numbers from prefixdata
+ local prefixdata = data.prefixdata
+ if prefixdata then
+ -- adapted from helpers.prefix (not sure)
+ if (prefixspec and prefixspec == no) or
prefixdata.prefix == no then
+ prefixdata = false
+ end
+ sections.typesetnumber(prefixdata,"prefix", prefixspec
or false, prefixdata)
+ end
+ --
sections.typesetnumber(numberdata,"number",numberspec,numberdata)
else
local useddata = data.useddata
After this small change, all the references are correct. However, I'm
quite new to
Re: [NTG-context] Wrong prefix in cross references to formulas in external document
I, too, am struggling with external (and internal) references.
I have created (and sent to Hans) a MWE that seems to identify two bugs:
1) External references: in a single product, some of these work, and
*some* do not render the numbers (using \in{} [ref], for example). They
are, however, identified as known or "verified".
2) Internal references: all render but *some* get "missing link target"
errors (in the PDF viewer).
I have not been able to get anywhere with the (lua) code, myself.
Alan
On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 19:03:32 +0300
Yaroslav Beltukov via ntg-context wrote:
> Dear Hans and all contributors,
>
> I really appreciate ConTeXt for the right way to obtain high quality
> documents. I'm a theoretical physicist and I'm going to write a book.
> I think ConTeXt is the right choice to work with a number of formulas,
> figures and cross-references. The visual quality of formulas is
> better than in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula
> autosplitting looks also very promising. For me it is important to
> obtain the high quality without a lot of manual tweaks of each
> formula for each given document format and figure placement.
>
> However, I have found a problem with references if I compile one
> component only. The references to formulas in other components have
> wrong prefixes, e.g. (2.1) instead of (3.1). Needless to say, the
> right formula references are very important.
>
> I started looking into this issue. The references to other components
> are taken from the whole product as from an external document. It
> turned out that this is a general problem with references with
> prefixes to external documents. The prefix is stored in a tuc file as
> a reference to a section as a sequential number of the header in the
> document. As a result, the prefix from the external document is
> calculated using the structure of the current document.
>
> Here is the MWE, which consists of two files:
> foo.tex:
>
> \defineenumeration[remark][prefix=yes, prefixsegments=chapter:section]
>
> \starttext
>
> Equations: \in[eq1], \in[eq2], \in[eq3], \in[eq4]
>
> Sections: \in[sec1], \in[sec2], \in[sec3], \in[sec4]
>
> Chapters: \in[chap1], \in[chap2], \in[chap3], \in[chap4]
>
> Remarks: \in[remark1], \in[remark2]
>
> \startbodymatter
>
> \chapter[chap1]{Chapter}
> \placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> \chapter[chap2]{Chapter}
> \section[sec1]{Section}
> \section[sec2]{Section}
> \placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> \placeformula[eq2]\startformula x = y\stopformula
>
> \stopbodymatter
>
> \startappendices
>
> \chapter[chap3]{Chapter}
> \section[sec3]{Section}
> \placeformula[eq3]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> \section[sec4]{Section}
> \startremark[remark1]\stopremark
> \placeformula[eq4]\startformula x = y\stopformula
> \startremark[remark2]\stopremark
> \chapter[chap4]{Chapter}
>
> \stopappendices
>
> \stoptext
>
>
> bar.tex:
>
> \starttext
>
> Equations: \in[foo::eq1], \in[foo::eq2], \in[foo::eq3], \in[foo::eq4]
>
> Sections: \in[foo::sec1], \in[foo::sec2], \in[foo::sec3],
> \in[foo::sec4]
>
> Chapters: \in[foo::chap1], \in[foo::chap2], \in[foo::chap3],
> \in[foo::chap4]
>
> Remarks: \in[foo::remark1], \in[foo::remark2]
>
> % any chapters and sections here
>
> \stoptext
>
> It is expected to have the same first page on these documents:
>
> Equations: 1.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
> Sections: 2.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
> Chapters: 1, 2, A, B
> Remarks: A.2.1, A.2.2
>
> However, the bar.tex produces wrong prefixes to formulas and remarks.
> The output depends on the document structure of bar.tex, not foo.tex.
>
> I started looking into the source code. Thanks to lua, it is not a
> big deal to track the problem. The prefixdata is complemented by the
> sectiondata after the loading the tuc file. So, the question is: is
> it possible to store the full prefixdata with all necessary prefix
> numbers in the tuc file? Here is my proposal to change the source
> code:
>
> --- strc-lst-old.lmt2023-01-29 11:30:15.610309948 +0300
> +++ strc-lst.lmt2023-01-29 12:10:08.864228923 +0300
> @@ -266,6 +266,16 @@
> if r and not r.section then
> r.section = structures.sections.currentid()
> end
> +-- store sectiondata in prefixdata (necessary for external files)
> +if t.prefixdata and r.section then
> +local sectiondata = structures.sections.collected[r.section]
> +if sectiondata then
> +for k, v in next, sectiondata do
> +t.prefixdata[k] = v
> +end
> +end
> +end
> +--
> local b = r and t.block
> if r and not b then
> local s = r.section
>
> --- strc-ref-old.lmt2023-01-29 11:30:15.823643904 +0300
> +++ strc-ref.lmt2023-01-29 12:07:45.697109862 +0300
> @@ -2318,7 +2318,17 @@
> if data then
> numberdata = lists.reordered(data) -- data.numberdata
> if numberdata then
> -helpers.prefix(data,prefixspec)
> +
[NTG-context] Wrong prefix in cross references to formulas in external document
Dear Hans and all contributors,
I really appreciate ConTeXt for the right way to obtain high quality
documents. I'm a theoretical physicist and I'm going to write a book. I
think ConTeXt is the right choice to work with a number of formulas,
figures and cross-references. The visual quality of formulas is better than
in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula autosplitting looks also
very promising. For me it is important to obtain the high quality without a
lot of manual tweaks of each formula for each given document format and
figure placement.
However, I have found a problem with references if I compile one component
only. The references to formulas in other components have wrong prefixes,
e.g. (2.1) instead of (3.1). Needless to say, the right formula references
are very important.
I started looking into this issue. The references to other components are
taken from the whole product as from an external document. It turned out
that this is a general problem with references with prefixes to external
documents. The prefix is stored in a tuc file as a reference to a section
as a sequential number of the header in the document. As a result, the
prefix from the external document is calculated using the structure of the
current document.
Here is the MWE, which consists of two files:
foo.tex:
\defineenumeration[remark][prefix=yes, prefixsegments=chapter:section]
\starttext
Equations: \in[eq1], \in[eq2], \in[eq3], \in[eq4]
Sections: \in[sec1], \in[sec2], \in[sec3], \in[sec4]
Chapters: \in[chap1], \in[chap2], \in[chap3], \in[chap4]
Remarks: \in[remark1], \in[remark2]
\startbodymatter
\chapter[chap1]{Chapter}
\placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\chapter[chap2]{Chapter}
\section[sec1]{Section}
\section[sec2]{Section}
\placeformula[eq1]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\placeformula[eq2]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\stopbodymatter
\startappendices
\chapter[chap3]{Chapter}
\section[sec3]{Section}
\placeformula[eq3]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\section[sec4]{Section}
\startremark[remark1]\stopremark
\placeformula[eq4]\startformula x = y\stopformula
\startremark[remark2]\stopremark
\chapter[chap4]{Chapter}
\stopappendices
\stoptext
bar.tex:
\starttext
Equations: \in[foo::eq1], \in[foo::eq2], \in[foo::eq3], \in[foo::eq4]
Sections: \in[foo::sec1], \in[foo::sec2], \in[foo::sec3], \in[foo::sec4]
Chapters: \in[foo::chap1], \in[foo::chap2], \in[foo::chap3], \in[foo::chap4]
Remarks: \in[foo::remark1], \in[foo::remark2]
% any chapters and sections here
\stoptext
It is expected to have the same first page on these documents:
Equations: 1.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
Sections: 2.1, 2.2, A.1, A.2
Chapters: 1, 2, A, B
Remarks: A.2.1, A.2.2
However, the bar.tex produces wrong prefixes to formulas and remarks. The
output depends on the document structure of bar.tex, not foo.tex.
I started looking into the source code. Thanks to lua, it is not a big deal
to track the problem. The prefixdata is complemented by the sectiondata
after the loading the tuc file. So, the question is: is it possible to
store the full prefixdata with all necessary prefix numbers in the tuc
file? Here is my proposal to change the source code:
--- strc-lst-old.lmt2023-01-29 11:30:15.610309948 +0300
+++ strc-lst.lmt2023-01-29 12:10:08.864228923 +0300
@@ -266,6 +266,16 @@
if r and not r.section then
r.section = structures.sections.currentid()
end
+-- store sectiondata in prefixdata (necessary for external files)
+if t.prefixdata and r.section then
+local sectiondata = structures.sections.collected[r.section]
+if sectiondata then
+for k, v in next, sectiondata do
+t.prefixdata[k] = v
+end
+end
+end
+--
local b = r and t.block
if r and not b then
local s = r.section
--- strc-ref-old.lmt2023-01-29 11:30:15.823643904 +0300
+++ strc-ref.lmt2023-01-29 12:07:45.697109862 +0300
@@ -2318,7 +2318,17 @@
if data then
numberdata = lists.reordered(data) -- data.numberdata
if numberdata then
-helpers.prefix(data,prefixspec)
+-- helpers.prefix(data,prefixspec)
+-- use the actual numbers from prefixdata
+local prefixdata = data.prefixdata
+if prefixdata then
+-- adapted from helpers.prefix (not sure)
+if (prefixspec and prefixspec == no) or prefixdata.prefix
== no then
+prefixdata = false
+end
+sections.typesetnumber(prefixdata,"prefix", prefixspec or
false, prefixdata)
+end
+--
sections.typesetnumber(numberdata,"number",numberspec,numberdata)
else
local useddata = data.useddata
After this small change, all the references are correct. However, I'm quite
new to ConTeXt, so maybe here are some caveats. It would be great to fix
the references to formulas, especially for the forthcoming
