On 17-6-2010 3:11, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 19:56, Wolfgang Schuster
<schuster.wolfg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi,
i plan to update cont-en.xml with changes in mkiv (new keys and commands)
but i'm unsure if it's good to mix mkii and mkiv. I think it's to make a
separate definition file for mkiv which contains the extra keys for the
commands (e.g. sectionsegments for \setuphead) and use the current one for
mkii only.
My opinion (though at the end you may do it either way): I would put a
special key to either each command or each option that would clarify
"mkii only" or "mkiv only" or "both". If command is completely
different, for example
\usetypescript[name][ec] in mkii vs. \usetypescript[name] in mkiv
one could define two commands and label one as "mkii only" and the
second one as "mkiv only".
there is already something like that but not applied yet to all commands
There might be also another thing worth keeping in mind. Some commands
may be valid, but useless in mkiv. It might make sense to label those
as such.
Even though the fact that "mkii is frozen" might be true, most of
valid options are still missing in those xml files.
well, 'most' is not fair
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
dev-context mailing list
dev-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-context
