RE: [NTG-context] Re: Table of contents, alternative d

Hi Patrick, This is how my toc appears: Part 1 first part 1–1 (1) Chapter one 1–2 (2) Chapter two 1–3 (3) Chapter three 1–4 (4) Chapter four 1–5 (5) Chapter five 1–6 Part 2 second part 2–1 (1) Chapter one 2–2 (2) Chapter two 2–3 (3) Chapter three 2–4 (4) Chapter four 2–5 (5) Chapter five 2–6 Part

Re: [NTG-context] Re: Table of contents, alternative d

Dirar BOUGATEF wrote: Hi Patrick, This is how my toc appears: Part 1 first part 11 (1) Chapter one 12 (2) Chapter two 13 (3) Chapter three 14 (4) Chapter four 15 (5) Chapter five 16 Part 2 second part 21 (1) Chapter one 22 (2) Chapter two 23 (3) Chapter three 24 (4) Chapter four 25 (5) Chapter

Re: [NTG-context] Re: Table of contents, alternative d

Wha Thanks a lot to you all. Hans, I have tried: \startnarrower[4*right] \placecontent \stopnarrower \blank[4*big] This is exactly what i meant. Unfortunately, there is a problem, which is in my opinion not related to TOC, but to Tex (or Context, you'll be able to tell). i get a result

[NTG-context] Black generation in cmyk output

Hello, I was wondering if it is possible to influence the level of black component generation in cmyk ConTeXt output? Piotr -- Piotr Kopszak, Ph.D. Polish Art Gallery, National Museum in Warsaw -http://kopszak.mnw.art.pl/

Re: [NTG-context] Black generation in cmyk output

Hi, Piotr Kopszak wrote: Hello, I was wondering if it is possible to influence the level of black component generation in cmyk ConTeXt output? In the automatic conversion of metapost you mean? Well, you can turn black generation on (\setupcolors[reduce=no]) or turn it off ([reduce=yes]) ...

Re: [NTG-context] m-bib, \cite and no year?

Taco Hoekwater wrote: In authoryear styles, year entries are usually required, so I am going to keep this as it is now. You can either use \cite[author] for this case, or you could build your own \cite command, in a similar way to Tobias' answer: Sorry for bothering you that much. I'm now

[NTG-context] Tex Live 2004 + context

Today I was about to install TeX Live 2003, to then install Context lastest release. But I found that Tex Live 2004 was released the 27th (3 days ago). I notice the texmf directory structure has been changed in 2004. What do you guys recommend? 2003+context? Or is the latest context installation

[NTG-context] Re: Tex Live 2004 + context

Hi, Today I was about to install TeX Live 2003, to then install Context lastest release. But I found that Tex Live 2004 was released the 27th (3 days ago). I notice the texmf directory structure has been changed in 2004. What do you guys recommend? 2003+context? Or is the latest context

Re: [NTG-context] Re: Tex Live 2004 + context

I am using linux Fedora Core 3. It came witha *very* old tex installation with context version 2003. If I understand your advice, I should use texlive2003 and thelatest context from lastweek upload in pragma? thank youPatrick Gundlach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Today I was about to install TeX

[NTG-context] Re: Tex Live 2004 + context

Hello Ciro, I am using linux Fedora Core 3. It came with a *very* old tex installation with context version 2003. If I understand your advice, I should use texlive2003 and the latest context from last week upload in pragma? No, something more recent then texlive 2003. Perhaps texlive 2004