Am 04.03.2011 um 19:56 schrieb Hans Hagen:
On 4-3-2011 7:05, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
In which are these alternatives are better than my module__command, you
replace only the _ by !
because an ! stands out; anyway, we should avoid multiple _ in a row
It may stand out but it looks even
Am 06.03.2011 um 00:03 schrieb Aditya Mahajan:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 4-3-2011 7:05, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
In which are these alternatives are better than my module__command, you
replace only the _ by !
because an ! stands out; anyway, we should avoid multiple _
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, luigi scarso wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote:
On 4-3-2011 12:55, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
I also like \module_command. That is better than \modulecommand
that I have been using. Of course, this means that _ should not have its
usual
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 4-3-2011 7:05, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
In which are these alternatives are better than my module__command, you
replace only the _ by !
because an ! stands out; anyway, we should avoid multiple _ in a row
(i'll put a few mkvi modules in the core to
On 4-3-2011 12:55, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
I also like \module_command. That is better than \modulecommand
that I have been using. Of course, this means that _ should not have its
usual meaning. I haven't checked on how \unprotect works in MkII. If it
makes _ a letter, then I'll switch to
On 4-3-2011 12:55, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Another option might be to use \module.command with . having the
right catcode. That will give macro names a more OOP feel.
in a mkvi file we can actually support \module.command if we want as we
can convert it into \module_command so both would be
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote:
On 4-3-2011 12:55, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
I also like \module_command. That is better than \modulecommand
that I have been using. Of course, this means that _ should not have its
usual meaning. I haven't checked on how \unprotect
Am 04.03.2011 um 11:33 schrieb Hans Hagen:
I don’t like the __ and ___ either but do you know a better way for good
names without using do, dodo, nodo, yes or nop?
we can have module_do_bla or module_x_bla module_xx_bla etc
I think module_bla, module_bla_do, module_bla_redo etc. is better
On 4-3-2011 7:05, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
In which are these alternatives are better than my module__command, you replace
only the _ by !
because an ! stands out; anyway, we should avoid multiple _ in a row
(i'll put a few mkvi modules in the core to get a feeling .. using _
does not
Currently I am using something like
\defineenumeration[lemma]
[location=serried,
headstyle=bold,
text=Lemma,
width=broad,
style=italic]
to define theorems, lemmas, etc.
Sometimes a theorem or lemma will have its own name (e.g. Yoneda Lemma),
and I find it slightly cumbersome
Hi Severin,
Maybe this is what you want:
% begin
%% defining \proclaim which is built in Plain-teX
%% but has disappeared from ConTeXt
\defineenumeration[proclaim]
[text=,
style=slanted,
title=yes,
titleleft=,
titleright=,
location=serried,
Thank you for the quick reply, it is getting quite close. I guess the
trick is to define an enumeration for one-off use and use title= to
fake text=. The only problem is that the number sits between text and
title. So to still be able to use \starttheorem alongside
\startproclaim{Theorem}, I would
Hi Severin,
Actually if you are using mkiv, the definitions I sent this morning should be
slightly changed: perhaps the following suits your needs (however I don't know
how to change the style of the numbers…).
% begin
%!TEX TS-program = mkiv
%% defining \proclaim which is built in
Am 03.03.2011 um 09:05 schrieb S Barmeier:
\startenumeration[text={Yoneda Lemma},location= ... ]
Enumeration don’t support key-val-input for the commands and environments
(although it isn’t hard to add it). The both arguments are “[reference]”
and “{title}”.
Besides the already presented
With the current solution, I still have the problem that the numbers of
\starttheorem and \startproclaim{Theorem} are on the (resp.) left and
right side of the text/title and I don't know how to change that.
I still find \starttheorem[text={Special Theorem}] (and that is called
key-val-input?)
Am 03.03.2011 um 16:00 schrieb S Barmeier:
With the current solution, I still have the problem that the numbers of
\starttheorem and \startproclaim{Theorem} are on the (resp.) left and
right side of the text/title and I don't know how to change that.
The order of the elements os fixed:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, S Barmeier wrote:
Currently I am using something like
\defineenumeration[lemma]
[location=serried,
headstyle=bold,
text=Lemma,
width=broad,
style=italic]
to define theorems, lemmas, etc.
Sometimes a theorem or lemma will have its own name (e.g. Yoneda
On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Am 03.03.2011 um 09:05 schrieb S Barmeier:
\startenumeration[text={Yoneda Lemma},location= ... ]
Enumeration don’t support key-val-input for the commands and environments
(although it isn’t hard to add it). The both arguments are “[reference]”
Am 03.03.2011 um 19:18 schrieb Aditya Mahajan:
\usemodule[annotation]
A very useful module to have! But how is it different from enumerations
(apart from having a modern interface)? in particular, would you consider
reimplimenting definitions and enumerations by using annotations as a
On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
I am a bit surprised by the naming of the internal macros:
annotation_cmd
annotation__cmd
annotation___cmd
I liked the LaTeX3 system to have names in the form \module_command,
with this you have a easy way to protect internal commands and to
20 matches
Mail list logo
