Hi Olivier,
Thanks for your reaction. My original proposal was:
\startitemize
\beginblockA
\item Apple
\endblockA
\beginblockB
\item Pomme
\endBlockB
\beginblockA
\item Pear
\endblockA
\beginblockB
\item Poire
\endBlockB
\stopitemize
This does not work.
The advantage of this setup is that in a bilingual document, printed
separatedly, I have both languages underneath and thus more control than when I
use separate itemize environments, such as proposed by Taco, and what I had
thought of earlier:
\beginblockA
\startitemize
....
\stopitemize
\endblockA
\beginblockB
\startitemize
....
\stopitemize
\endblockB
Nevertheless, if my proposal does not work, I guess I'll have to try it this
way.
Kind regards,
Rob
> Hi,
>
>
> I might be wrong, but I think blocks are intended as buffered text.
> This way it is not good to use
> \item {block A}{bloc B}
> and it is not good as well to use {\item block A}
> {\item block B}
>
>
> I think the only good way to use block is
> {\startitemize
> \item block A
> \stoptitemize}
> {\startitemize
> \item block B
> \stoptitemize}
> were good means a natural utilisation of blocks.
>
> However, I certainly understand that the third solution is not practical
> for your intended usage.
>
> Maybe a newif is more appropriate to your situation:
> \newif\ifenlang and \ifenlang \else \fi switches,
> or maybe even cases if you have more than one language.
>
> Just some thought hoping it helps,
> Olivier
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
