On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 01:57:22PM -0400, john Culleton wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2013 11:30:54 +0200
> Wolfgang Schuster <schuster.wolfg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Am 13.10.2013 um 06:09 schrieb Ciro A. Soto <c...@kavyata.com>:
> > 
> > > sorry, I just saw an old chain of messages about this question... I
> > > fixed it with the translation module. \usemodule[translate]
> > > \translateinput[``][“]
> > > \enableinputtranslation
> > 
> > Better use real quotation marks “ and ” or \quotation{…}.
> > 
> > Wolfgang
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Why is it better? And why is it so difficult to just reinstall the
> traditional TeX method of handling quotes? Even the MSWin version of
> smart quotes using the " glyph would be a worthwhile simplification. 

Because the “traditional TeX” was a font hack, if you are fine with
using the original Knuth fonts you can still get it. Modern fonts do not
implement such a feature. Besides, \quotation{…} provide much more
options (like being language sensitive, or handling nested quotes and so
on).

Regards,
Khaled
___________________________________________________________________________________
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  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to