Dnia Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:56:32AM +0100, Wolfgang Schuster napisał(a):
> 2008/10/25 Marcin Borkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Dnia Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 02:58:24AM +0200, Diego Depaoli napisał(a):
> >> 2008/10/23 Wolfgang Schuster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >
> >> > \def\ItemNumber#1%
> >> > {\expandafter\doItemNumber#1..\relax}
> >> >
> >> > \def\doItemNumber#1.#2.#3\relax
> >> > {\doifelsenothing{#2}
> >> > {#1}
> >> > {#2}}
> >> >
> >> > \definereferenceformat[initem][left=\ItemNumber]
> >> Since I don't speak that language, someone could explain why this code
> >> doesn't work when I put a stopper in subitemization?
> >> The standard dot isn't a stopper itself?
> >
> > This code seems to work (approximately) like this: it expands the "full"
> > reference, which is:
> > <number> <dot> <number> <dot> <something, probably space>
> > and selects "everything from the first dot up to the second one (w/o the
> > dots themselves). So I consider it to be a bit dirty hack (sorry,
> > Wolfgang;)), in a sense that it is not very flexible.
>
> It's just hack at user level, a dirty hack would redefine core macros but
> this is what I try to avoid.
OK, sorry - probably we have different semantics of "dirty" (or, more
probably, we're talking about different "levels" of dirtiness). Here I
meant roughly that this hack is not very flexible.
> > If your stopper is, say ")" (and the second one, say, "]", so you have
> > references in a strange form like "1)2]"), you might want to say
> > something like
> > \def\doItemNumber #1)#2]#3\relax
> > (the space after \doItemNumber is gobbled by TeX, so it might be present
> > here or not, it is a matter of taste only).
> > If you have different stoppers, another approach might be reasonable. I
> > can see two possibilities:
> > 1. Get to know _where_ ConTeXt really keeps the relevant info about
> > labels; if the info about the values (w/o stoppers) is preserved, we are
> > saved, if not, we've got a problem;
> > 2. so in the latter case we have to (?) use this kind of hacky solution,
> > which might be something like this (assuming that \stopper and \stopperr
> > are the first- and second level stoppers respectively):
> >
> > \edef\sometemporarymacroname{%
> > \def\noexpand\doItemNumber ##1\stopper ##2\stopperr ##3\relax
> > {\noexpand\doifelsenothing{##2}
> > {##1}
> > {##2}}%
> > }%
> > \sometemporarymacroname
> >
> > (I'm not sure whether the last percentage sign is needed, but a good
> > rule of thumb is to put them everywhere after <closing brace> <newline>,
> > so that the newlines don't get translated into spaces.)
>
> You don't need the comment sign at the end of the macro in outer level
> but you need it for local definitons in other macros if your're in
> horizontal mode.
Shame on me, being a mathematician and being sooo imprecise:):)
> > I'm not sure whether this works, though, *please* check it and tell me
> > (maybe I'm doing some stupid error, please the TeX gurus correct me if
> > yes). I hope this is ok, though, because then it my first post to this
> > list containing actually an _answer_ and not a _question_:))).
>
> Thanks to explain my solution.
You're welcome:).
> Wolfgang
Greets
--
Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl)
Jeść. Pić. Spać. Wstać. Kupić. Sprzedać. Mieć.
Możesz więcej chcieć - czegoś więcej!
(40i30na70)
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
