On 13/08/18 15:18, Rik Kabel wrote:
%% How can one remove blank lines at the start of a buffer so that
%% commands that grab a buffer can be used in the same way as, for
%% example, \startparagraph...\stopparagraph, which allow blank
%% lines around the content?
%%
%% The problem appears
On Sun, 12 Aug 2018, Rik Kabel wrote:
%% How can one remove blank lines at the start of a buffer so that
%% commands that grab a buffer can be used in the same way as, for
%% example, \startparagraph...\stopparagraph, which allow blank
%% lines around the content?
%%
%% The problem
%% How can one remove blank lines at the start of a buffer so that
%% commands that grab a buffer can be used in the same way as, for
%% example, \startparagraph...\stopparagraph, which allow blank
%% lines around the content?
%%
%% The problem appears when an optional argument is allowed
> On 12. Aug 2018, at 17:38, Pablo Rodriguez wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> the reference command in notes is \in (for both MkII and MkIV), such as in:
>
>\starttext
>\dorecurse{30}{\footnote{Footnote}}
>\footnote[uvu-avu]{These two suffixes […]}
>
> On 12. Aug 2018, at 17:52, Pablo Rodriguez wrote:
>
> Sorry, Robert, I almost forgot it.
>
> If you reset the footnote numbers in each chapter, I’d rather suggest
> something similar to:
>
> \footnote{See n.~\in[uvu-avu] on p.~\at[uvu-avu].}
>
> Since footnote numbers aren’t unique,
On 08/12/2018 05:38 PM, Pablo Rodriguez wrote:
>> On 08/12/2018 04:34 PM, Robert Zydenbos wrote:
>> [..]
>> …
>> \footnote[uvu-avu]{These two suffixes […]}
>> …
>> \footnote{See n.~\note[uvu-avu].}
>> …
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> the reference command in notes is \in (for both MkII and MkIV), such
> as
On 08/12/2018 04:34 PM, Robert Zydenbos wrote:
> Another footnote question for the experts. I want to refer to a note
> from within another, later note. I thought I could do this in
> the following way:
>
> …
> \footnote[uvu-avu]{These two suffixes […]}
> …
> \footnote{See n.~\note[uvu-avu].}
> …
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:29:41AM +0200, Pablo Rodriguez wrote:
> I realize that the fault is mine, but with backwards compatibility I
> meant that the same operation (10 + "10") gives different results with
> different Lua versions.
It doesn’t, it returns 10 in both cases. The difference is
Another footnote question for the experts. I want to refer to a note from
within another, later note. I thought I could do this in the following way:
…
\footnote[uvu-avu]{These two suffixes […]
…
\footnote{See n.~\note[uvu-avu].}
…
But I get this result:
There are two things wrong:
(1) I
On 8/11/2018 11:33 AM, Pablo Rodriguez wrote:
On 08/09/2018 10:20 PM, Hans Åberg wrote:
On 9 Aug 2018, at 21:20, Pablo Rodriguez wrote:
[...]
My background is in humanities and I don’t understand the exponent for
being a float ("10²" contains an exponent
10 matches
Mail list logo
