[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-23 Thread Thomas Meyer
That's it! Many thanks to Hans, Hraban and especially Wolfgang for his solution. This environment should become part of ConTeXt! I have been a LaTeX/XeTeX/LuaLaTeX user for over 30 years and used it to write my papers during my studies and use it for almost all my writing. Now I wanted to try

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-22 Thread Wolfgang Schuster
Thomas Meyer schrieb am 22.01.2024 um 13:04: Am 22.01.24 um 12:06 schrieb Henning Hraban Ramm: Am 22.01.24 um 11:46 schrieb Thomas Meyer: I might get a bit impatient if I have the impression that others get an answer faster. Sorry for that. It’s not unusual to get that impression. It

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-22 Thread Thomas Meyer
Am 22.01.24 um 12:06 schrieb Henning Hraban Ramm: Am 22.01.24 um 11:46 schrieb Thomas Meyer: I might get a bit impatient if I have the impression that others get an answer faster. Sorry for that. It’s not unusual to get that impression. It depends on the current attention, capacity and

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-22 Thread Henning Hraban Ramm
Am 22.01.24 um 11:46 schrieb Thomas Meyer: I might get a bit impatient if I have the impression that others get an answer faster. Sorry for that. It’s not unusual to get that impression. It depends on the current attention, capacity and mood of the few who can answer your questions. So the

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-22 Thread Thomas Meyer
Hi Hans, I might get a bit impatient if I have the impression that others get an answer faster. Sorry for that. I thought my example couldn't be any smaller. The only answer I got from Wolfgang was the question for a mwe. Now I found the missing comma and  grid works with the new version

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-22 Thread Hans Hagen via ntg-context
On 1/22/2024 10:47 AM, Thomas Meyer wrote: Hi Hans, maybe you understand the question mark now, you are part of it. Unfortunately, I haven't received a reply to my last e-mail from January 18. No I don't. Are you sayign that you want an instant reply every time? I assume you realize that

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 ("Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-22 Thread Thomas Meyer
Hi Hans, maybe you understand the question mark now, you are part of it. Unfortunately, I haven't received a reply to my last e-mail from January 18. Maybe only those whose questions are more serious, more interesting or whatever will get an answer. I do not understand what you mean with

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118

2024-01-18 Thread Thomas Meyer
Am 18.01.24 um 13:51 schrieb luigi scarso: On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 at 13:00, Thomas Meyer wrote: What is going on? Yesterday I got a perfect on-grid-written document! But today, with the newest context-version (20240118) all changed for the worse. I may not get a reply

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118 (was: "Registerhaltigkeit")

2024-01-18 Thread luigi scarso
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 at 13:00, Thomas Meyer wrote: > What is going on? > > Yesterday I got a perfect on-grid-written document! > But today, with the newest context-version (20240118) all changed for the > worse. > > I may not get a reply to this e-mail either! > > > Am 17.01.24 um 20:57 schrieb

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118

2024-01-18 Thread Thomas Meyer
I may not understand it ... Where can I find the thread (which keyword?)and which values are bad? Greetings Thomas Am 18.01.24 um 13:06 schrieb Hans Hagen via ntg-context: as follow up on the keyword thread we decided to treat bad values to equivalent to 'no'

[NTG-context] Re: context version 20240118

2024-01-18 Thread Hans Hagen via ntg-context
On 1/18/2024 12:59 PM, Thomas Meyer wrote: What is going on? Yesterday I got a perfect on-grid-written document! But today, with the newest context-version (20240118) all changed for the worse. as follow up on the keyword thread we decided to treat bad values to equivalent to 'no' I may