On 11/21/2013 11:40 AM, Lars Huttar wrote:
> In a thread from July
> (http://context.markmail.org/thread/6tgzusw45whaqghi), Marco Patzer
> raised some questions that we have too. They were somewhat answered, but
> I'm still not clear on what the meanings of the keywords are.
> On Jul 8, 2013 4:08:33 pm Hans wrote:
>> On 7/9/2013 12:30 AM, Marco Patzer wrote:
>>> / On 2013–07–08 Hans Hagen wrote:
>> />/
>> />>>/ I expect the markings on the left and right to be the same and show
>> />>>/ A–C on the first page and D–E on the second one. Looks like a bug to
>> />>>/ me.
>> />>/
>> />>/ use top and bottom
>> />/
>> />/ This works. Thanks.
>> />/
>> />>/ -- previous : last before sync
>> />>/ -- next     : first after sync
>> />>/
>> />>/ -- top      : first in sync
>> />>/ -- bottom   : last in sync
>> />>/
>> />>/ -- first    : first not top in sync
>> />>/ -- last     : last not bottom in sync
>> />/
>> />/ That is exactly what's in the wiki (Command/getmarking). To my
>> />/ defence: The manual (chapter 12.4) is outdated, it lists:
>> />/
>> />/    previous - the last of the previous page
>> />/    first    - the first of the actual page
>> />/    last     - the last of the actual page
>> />/    both     - first — last
>> />/    all      - previous — first — last
>> />/
>> />/ I have no idea what “first not top in sync” means, in contrast to
>> />/ “first of the actual page”, which is quite clear but wrong on a
>> />/ current MkIV.
>> /
>> old tex terminology ... in mkiv i don't use the build-in-tex marks at 
>> all (too much juggling needed to get things right)
> So I'm wondering ... Hans, since the descriptions you posted are old tex
> terminology, what do previous/next/top/bottom/first/last/etc. mean in
> current terminology?
> I agree with Marco that the descriptions in the ref manual are much
> easier to understand, but appear to be wrong; and do not include top/bottom.
> I'll be happy to update the ref manual and the wiki if I can get clear
> and accurate information.
> We have run many examples here, including the ones on the getmarking
> wiki page, trying to understand what these keywords mean.
> top/bottom do appear to do what we need in an MWE, but are not working
> for us in the real document, and knowing the meaning of these keywords
> would be very helpful in troubleshooting the problem.
> Thanks,
> Lars
I now have a MWE that shows the problem.
Where top and bottom work fine outside of columns, in mixedcolumns, any
keyword I use with \getmarking always seem to return the *last* item on
the page. Here's the MWE:

%\startsetups myheader

%F1: \getmarking[country][1][first] - L2: \getmarking[country][2][last]


%T1: \getmarking[country][1][top] - B2: \getmarking[country][2][bottom]


\startsetups myheader

F: \getmarking[country][first] - L: \getmarking[country][last]


T: \getmarking[country][top] - B: \getmarking[country][bottom]





{\bfb #1 \endgraf}

\dorecurse{1}{\input knuth \endgraf}




\startmixedcolumns[distance=5mm, balance=yes]









When you run the MWE, you see that all the fields in the page header
show the same value: whatever country appears last on the page. (Or
even, depending on how you tweak the length of the country text, if the
next page starts with a new country, you'll get that new country for the
old page.)

I also tried using column numbers, in imitation of the columnsets
example on the wiki at http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Command/getmarking

\startsetups myheader

F1: \getmarking[country][1][first] - L2: \getmarking[country][2][last]


T1: \getmarking[country][1][top] - B2: \getmarking[country][2][bottom]


But this didn't appear to make any difference. Maybe it works for
columnsets but not for mixedcolumns. Does anyone know how to get correct
results for \getmarking in mixedcolumns?


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