On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:06:42 +0100, Hans Hagen <pra...@wxs.nl> wrote:

actually, the luacode was doing the right thing as there is a protect/unprotect 
mismatch (will be fixed); puttingthis at the top of you file works:


thank you, Hans.

This makes both solutions (Ctx generated and Lua generated) equal - [wider] 
spacing is the same.

Just my point of view - the previous native Ctx result (= narrower spacing in subscript 
when mixing upper and lower case letters) - seemed to me a bit prettier; wouldn't be 
better to keep the "old" Ctx look (= result without \catcodetable\ctxcatcodes) 
and to drive Lua to give the same result?

Best regards,


Ing. Lukáš Procházka [mailto:l...@pontex.cz]
Pontex s. r. o.      [mailto:pon...@pontex.cz] [http://www.pontex.cz]
Bezová 1658
147 14 Praha 4

Tel: +420 244 062 238
Fax: +420 244 461 038

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