On 2018-02-18 16:05, Rik Kabel wrote:
On 2018-02-18 15:25, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Rik Kabel <mailto:cont...@rik.users.panix.com>
18. Februar 2018 um 21:06
On 2018-02-18 14:33, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
It does not matter how many fonts support both (LM does, and
Libertine). One feature of a BibTeX file is reusability for many
documents, and when the file is created you do not know what will be
the default emphasis of the document. By explicitly coding \it, you
are assured that the italic face will be attempted. If it is not
available, there should be an error message, and you can then have a
discussion with your editor. The claim of the new bibliography
subsystem is that it will implement APA strictly, and that calls for
italic.
I understand as well that \em allows switching (reverse emphasis as
noted above). It also provides some italic correction. I am asking
about the appropriate use of the two variations of \em: \emphÂ
(which is a grouped command \em) and \emphasized (defined as
\bgroup\em\let\nexttoken). I understand and make use of grouped
commands -- they are largely syntactic sugar, but I like sugar. I am
less certain of the purpose of \emphasized, how it works, and why it
might be useful. I do not recall seeing a command definition with a
bgroup and no egroup before.
\em -> {\em ...}
\emph -> \emph{...} or {\emph ...}
\emphasized -> \emphasized{...}
Wolfgang
Yes. \em is a font switch. \emph can be either a command or a font
switch. \emphasized is only a command. But why have \emphasized? Under
what circumstances would a casual user prefer it? Under what
circumstances a more advanced user, or someone writing a module,
employ it? What does it do differently than \emph used as a command?
Grepping the source, I see thirty or so occurrences of the pattern
\bgroup...\let\nexttoken. I do not understand just what it does. Can
you explain it, or direct me to a good place to learn about it?
Okay, with some off-list help and a bit more reading, I understand the
pattern used in the definition of \emphasized, or at least how it works.
I still do not know when it should be preferred. I suspect it is more
efficient than \emph. Is that the only advantage?
--
Rik
___________________________________________________________________________________
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://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
