Dear gang,

Thinking of present and future documents (maximum flexibility in converting from format to format), I'm moving from the standard {\em text} to something like \definehighlight[emph][style=italic]. Here's the question:

Does ConTeXt contain some default highlights that need not be defined by the user? It seems that some of the basic ones should have presets. This helps with at least two things:

1. Document portability (independent of a given style or env file);
2. Editor setups.

As an example of the latter: If I select text in Notepad++ I can do

Right-Click -> ConTeXt Typography -> Emphasize

where Emphasize is defined as {\em }

Right now, whenever I release an update to the N++ editor package (now years overdue, I know) any user can depend upon this right-click feature. But if I define


and set up the editor to implement it; then there is no guarantee that other users will use the same definition.

As issues of conversion from one format to another become ever more urgent and common, it makes more sense to use tagged and exportable versions of the common typographical functions and to standardize a few. So my suggestion is that we develop a set of default or "official" highlights for commonly used cases, with a list made available somewhere such as the wiki. Perhaps redefine some existing 1-parameter typography commands (\emph, \bold, \scap, etc.) as highlights. Some of these should be kept short (such as \emph, \bold) given their very frequent use.

Best wishes
Idris Samawi Hamid
Professor of Philosophy
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 

maillist : /
webpage  : /
archive  :
wiki     :

Reply via email to