On Monday 18 January 2010 13:50:25 Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> Hi,
> views63 wrote:
> > Hi  all,
> >
> > I'm using `` complex analysis'' the output is wrong.
> Not really. We (Hans and I) would say that it is now finally right. ;)
> > but using \ quotation (... ...) can output the correct quotation marks
> This is the right way to do it. Alternatively, you can use unicode
> characters to input the correct quotation marks.
> Best wishes,
> Taco

This is true of many standard TeX ligatures (is this the right word here?)
such as ... (\ldots, \dots also works), << (\og), >> (\fg), "` (\glqq),
"' (\grqq), ~ (unbreakable space), etc.

This can be a bit disturbing for experienced TeX users.

OK, \quotation{} is cleaner and of course using unicode
characters may be even more readable, sometimes.

I have very mixed feelings, as I know how to type ...
but I never can recall the keyboard gymnastics necessary
to get this in unicode.
(Things are even worse on a Mac, as the standard keyboard
layout is missing lots of important characters.)

If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net

Reply via email to