> Am 02.10.2021 um 10:34 schrieb Wolfgang Schuster via ntg-context 
> <ntg-context@ntg.nl>:
> Rik Kabel via ntg-context schrieb am 27.09.2021 um 00:49:
>> Wolfgang (off-list),
>> It is simply wrong to say that \italicface as defined gives only \it or \bi 
>> as a result. Look at the definition. If the current fontalternative is it 
>> \it it will give a \tf result. It is sensitive to the current state in a 
>> similar way that \em and \emph are, but it will always give an italic or 
>> roman result.
> If we leave the comparisons between \em and \italicface aside and talk only 
> about the results from \italicface we have a common ground.
> You're right the results from \italicface aren't predictable and a fix is 
> needed but the same applies also to \boldface, \slantedface and \typeface.
> Attached is the output from a modified version of the styling command (the 
> \sc column is the fallback style). \swapface is unchanged and I'm not sure 
> about its output because it uses the \em code for italic and slanted which 
> means \setupbodyfontenvironment[default][em=blue] affects also the \swapface 
> results.

Thank you very much for attacking and clarifying this! It confused me from the 

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://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net

Reply via email to