Henning Hraban Ramm said this at Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:14:30 +0100:
>>> Hans, you planned to make \nomarking configurable, that one can use
>>> it with our without dots. Is it already in the beta?
>>> Actually I need it without dots.
>>
>> gimme a keyword ...
Do you mean this?
\hidetext[..,..=..,..]{ text }
where = *all*,list,marking
replace = *dots*,space
\setuphidetext[..=..]
(as above)
perhaps the "text" part suggests a more general mechanism than this is.
\hideheadpart ? \hideheadtext ?
>\nomarking hides headline texts in headers, \nolist does the same for
>lists (toc),
Yes, now that I know what those commands do :), I'm a bit confused at how
they interact. I can imagine wanting to hide the same or overlapping text
in headers/footers and ToC's, which is why I suggested a command spanning
both.
>but they dont't simply hide the text, but places an ellipsis (\dots{}).
>
>1. I'd like to use \nomarking and \nolist without any marking of the
>hidden text.
>2. redefining the commands is no ConTeXty way, I'd like some \setup...
>3. There was a hint to redefine the commands with \space, bit it didn't
>work;
>perhaps because I normally use them together.
>x. The stops of \dots are generally a bit too much spaced.
>
>Enough keywords? :-)
>
>BTW: Adam Lindsay asked the same.
Huh. yes, I guess I did. sorry I didn't pay better attention to your
thread earlier.
adam
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Adam T. Lindsay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computing Dept, Lancaster University +44(0)1524/594.537
Lancaster, LA1 4YR, UK Fax:+44(0)1524/593.608
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
