Re: [NTG-context] Captials in section head
Is there also a way how to achieve this in MkII ? (other than by hand)
Cheers
Carsten
Am 04.06.2009 um 16:34 schrieb richard.steph...@converteam.com:
Am 04.06.2009 um 14:56 schrieb richard.steph...@converteam.com:
I need all section heads to be in full-size capitals, so I tried:
\setuphead[section][textcommand=\uppercase]
\starttext
\section{New section}
\input knuth
\stoptext
But I still get lowercase.
Using 'textcommand=\cap' gives me small capitals, but I want full-size
capitals.
Is there a way to get what I want?
In MkIV you can say \setuphead[section][style=WORD] or
\setuphead[section][style=\WORD]
Wolfgang
That's fantastic, thanks Wolfgang.
Richard
Converteam UK Ltd. Registration Number: 5571739 and Converteam Ltd.
Registration Number: 2416188
Registered in England and Wales.
Registered office: Boughton Road, Rugby, Warwickshire, CV21 1BU.
CONFIDENTIALITY : This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be
privileged. If you are not a named recipient, please notify the sender
immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, use it for
any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] Creating a nomenclature section?
On 18.02.2009 at 16:45 wrote Michael Bynum: Yes, I think this will suit my needs. Thank you. I have one additional question though. In the command \definesynonyms[nomenclature][nomenclatures][\infull] What does the [nomenclatures] field do? Looking at the manual it seems to be the plural name input, but what purpose does it serve? Other than letting ConTeXt know that \completelistofnomenclatures % - note the plural and \placelistofnomenclatures % - same here belong to the 'nomenclature' definition... No idea, but since one can (easily) define commands / synonyms in other languages and not all use a simple 'add an s for plural' ... My guess is, it is just for that (and very convenient at that) Cheers Carsten ___ 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://tex.aanhet.net archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Creating a nomenclature section?
Dear Mike
if something simple is what you had in mind for this, you might want
to try this:
\definesynonyms[nomenclature][nomenclatures][\infull]
\setupsynonyms[nomenclature] %[criterium=all]
\starttext
\completelistofnomenclatures
\section{Some section}
% these could be placed anywhere
\nomenclature[PI]{$\pi$}{the ratio of the circumference with respect
to the diameter of a circle}
\nomenclature[Dia]{$d$}{the diameter of a circle}
% References to them can be placed inside the definition,
% you might want to write a macro for that if that is a feature you
use often
\input knuth
This is the symbol \PI. Please note that no math mode has to be used
here as that is taken care of in the definition.
% Nor for the diameter \Dia.
And just using the list of nomenclatures again:
\placelistofnomenclatures
Produces a list (sorted) of all or all used 'nomenclatures'. See also
the section about abbreviations in the ConTeXt handbook.
There is also the \type{...register} suite of commands if page entries
etc.\ are more what is needed.
\stoptext
Cheers
Carsten
Am 12.02.2009 um 21:00 schrieb Michael Bynum:
I haven't been able to find any documentation about producing a
nomenclature section in a document using context. In the absence of a
command/module providing the functionality of something like the
nomencl package in latex, I was wondering if anyone else had an
elegant work around for this issue. I guess I could just use a list
to make a nomenclature section, but that would lose a lot of the
functionality that makes something like nomencl useful.
Mike
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] Bug: Messy results when using table in head and multi-page tables in text
Dear Peter and Wolfgang,
sorry for taking a bit longer to come back to you and your suggestions
here.
But I got some strange results and did some further testing and trying
on all this.
What got me a bit, was/is that your suggestion below works as is, but
fails with only slightly more complicated tables. Specifically, in the
case where there is more than one row.
Furthermore, one can't leave out
\starttablehead\stoptablehead
\starttabletail\stoptabletail
even in the case of just using the table environment, instead of
tables. Don't ask me why.
In short, Peter, while your solution works as is, I would not
recommend it for anything more complicated then the example below, and
in that case one is probably better of using the framed solution from
Wolfgang. Either that, or using the earlier idea with overlay from
Wolfgang
\definelayer
[pagehead]
[width=\paperwidth,
height=\paperheight,
state=repeat]
\setlayer
[pagehead]
[hoffset=\backspace,
voffset=\topspace]
{\setups{pagehead}}
\setupbackgrounds[page][background=pagehead]
This works just fine. THANKS A LOT for this. :-D
I had been playing around with overlays at the very beginning of my
ConTeXt tries and had soon come to the conclusion to do some more
basic stuff first and ... somehow never got back around to it up till
now.
However, it is the way to go here, as it does indeed separate -
somehow - the inner workings of the table structures enough so that
ConTeXt is no longer getting confused about them anymore.
In short, this works as advertised.
Cheers
Carsten
P.S.: Still would be nice to have this issue fixed.
P.S.S.: It does not help with the second bug within the tables
environment, i.e. the starting \HL line in the tabletail introducing
an extra and unwanted! gap in the table.
Ugly workaround for me at the moment is drawing a not completely line
by using \framed[width=broad,topframe=on]{} above the text.
While slightly better than either no line or a line with said gap, it
is not exactly what I had in mind here, either...
Am 21.01.2008 um 12:45 schrieb Peter Rolf:
Peter Rolf schrieb:
Hi Carsten,
I'm not quite sure if this is a help (was just playing around with
it while watching snooker).
I had to clear|redefine the table head|tail in the page head (or is
this intended?). There are still some unwanted vertical offsets
above|below the page head. If you use a hbox instead of a vbox for
the page head you will see the difference on the last page. So this
space is introduced by the splitted table somehow. Don't ask me for
details ;)
Best wishes,
Peter
oeps... some details were missing :D
\setupcolors[state=start]
\setuppagenumbering[location=]
\setupheadertexts[{\setups[pagehead]}] [] [{\setups[pagehead]}] []
\startsetups[pagehead]
\vbox\bgroup
\starttablehead\stoptablehead
\starttabletail\stoptabletail
\setuptables[rulecolor=blue]%
\SetTableToWidth\makeupwidth
\starttable[|p(40mm)|p(60mm)|p(40mm)|]
% \TABLEnoalign{\vskip-1.75pt} % ugly
\HL
\VL \leftaligned{left} \VL \midaligned{middle} \VL
\rightaligned{right} \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptable
\egroup
\stopsetups
\starttext
\showframe
\showskips
\start
\SetTableToWidth\makeupwidth
\setuptables[split=repeat]
\starttablehead
\HL
\VL Head \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptablehead
\starttabletail
\HL % This results in an additional bug,
% i.e. an extra / unwanted gap
\VL Foot \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptabletail
\starttables[|p(.95\textwidth)|]
\VL \input knuth \VL\FR
%\dorecurse{1}{\VL \input tufte \VL\MR}
\dorecurse{10}{\VL \input tufte \VL\MR}
\VL \input knuth \VL\LR
% \HL % putting \HL here does not introduce
% that unwanted gap ...?!?
\stoptables
\stop
\stoptext
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
[NTG-context] Bug: Messy results when using table in head and multi-page tables in text
Dear ConTeXt experts,
I have setup a page layout where I use table in the page-head for
formatting quite a bit of stuff. (The example below is just a simple
as can be basic idea, to show the overall effect)
Now - as I can't prevent later users of this layout environment - to
not use \starttables ... \stoptables I naturally would like for this
to work in the text region as well.
This works fine and as advertised (well mostly, see below) as long as
the table does not spill over to the next page. In which case, things
start to look very messy, indeed.
From my (simple) point of view it looks like ConTeXt gets confused
about which format to use for which table and tries to do them all at
the same place or something.
Any chance to get this fixed ?
Thanks in advance
Carsten
P.S.: There is an additional bug (also concerning the single page
version and not related to having a table in the pagehead), which
puts in an extra (empty) gap in between the end of the tablebody and
the tablefoot when the tablefoot starts with \HL (and there is no \HL
at the end of tablebody).
Things work when putting the \HL at the end of the tablebody, but then
no \HL will be put on top of the foot for any intermediate pages of
the table, which is certainly not what one would usually want in this
case.
Anyway, here a simple version of this to demonstrate the effect(s)
\setuppagenumbering[location=]
\setupheadertexts[\setups{pagehead}][][\setups{pagehead}][]
\startsetups[pagehead]
\SetTableToWidth{\makeupwidth}
\starttable[|p(40mm)|p(60mm)|p(40mm)|]
\HL
\VL \leftaligned{left} \VL \midaligned{middle} \VL
\rightaligned{right} \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptable
\stopsetups
\starttext
\start
\SetTableToWidth{\makeupwidth}
\setuptables[split=repeat]
\starttablehead
\HL
\VL Head \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptablehead
\starttabletail
\HL % This results in an additional bug,
% i.e. an extra / unwanted gap
\VL Foot \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptabletail
\starttables[|p(.95\textwidth)|]
\VL \input knuth \VL\FR
%\dorecurse{1}{\VL \input tufte \VL\MR}
\dorecurse{10}{\VL \input tufte \VL\MR}
\VL \input knuth \VL\LR
% \HL % putting \HL here does not introduce
% that unwanted gap ...?!?
\stoptables
\stop
\stoptext
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] Bug: Messy results when using table in head and multi-page tables in text
Dear Wolfgang,
I tried that too already, but unfortunately I run into the same problem:
That is, if I use the natural tables in the header, I can't use them
for multi-page tables in the text, as again the results ain't pretty,
to say the least.
Here the ConTeXt to show what happens in that case
(and using your suggestion for the page-head with natural tables)
\setuppagenumbering[location=]
\setupheadertexts[\setups{pagehead}][][\setups{pagehead}][]
\startsetups[pagehead]
\bTABLE[option=stretch,strut=no,offset=.5em]
\bTR
\bTD[align={right,lohi},width=4cm] left \eTD
\bTD[align={middle,lohi},width=6cm] middle \eTD
\bTD[align={left,lohi},width=4cm] right \eTD
\eTR
\eTABLE
\stopsetups
\starttext
\bTABLE[split=repeat,option=stretch,strut=no,offset=.5em]
\bTABLEhead[rulethickness=1pt]
\bTR
\bTH[align={middle,lohi},width=6cm] head \eTH
\eTR
\eTABLEhead
\bTABLEbody%
%\dorecurse{1}{ % works
\dorecurse{10}{ % works NOT
\bTR
\bTD
{\input knuth \par}
\eTD
\eTR
}
\eTABLEbody
\bTABLEfoot
\bTR
\bTH footer \eTH
\eTR
\eTABLEfoot
\eTABLE
\stoptext
The thing is, I rather tell the users of this page-layout NOT to use
the \starttables ... \stoptables for multi-page tables, but rely on
the natural tables for those (which work nicely, even though I
_really_ would like to have a dedicated footer for each page here and
not just one for the last page! Which by the way is something one
doesn't need a dedicated command for, as one could _always_ just place
that part at the end of the body part, as that will be then at the end
of the table, i.e. the right place, no matter how many pages the table
has.)
However, given, that \starttables ... \stoptables doesn't give me the
correct footer in my case anyway, I rather have one type of table that
is quite a bit easier for me and my colleagues to use and adapt for
the multi-page tables, i.e. the 'natural' ones, and therefore keep
using table in the header.
But yes, thanks for the suggestion, unfortunately, TABLE seems to rely
on the same sort of buffer / storage / whatever mechanism, to do it's
multi-page magic
And that just doesn't work with having the same table-type in the
header, too.
(This is probably also true in case of the footer...)
Overall, things do work, as long as one does use the other type of
table or tables / TABLE in either header or text, but it works NOT
when you use the same in both...
Not quite sure, what's the reason for that or (and more importantly)
what can be done about it
With best regards
Carsten
P.S.: What is interesting is that on the last pages of a multi-page
table things do become sorted out again in either case and everything
looks more or less as it should (i.e. like in the single-page table)
Am 20.01.2008 um 14:10 schrieb Wolfgang Schuster:
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 12:37:13 +0100
Carsten Fechtmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear ConTeXt experts,
I have setup a page layout where I use table in the page-head for
formatting quite a bit of stuff. (The example below is just a simple
as can be basic idea, to show the overall effect)
Now - as I can't prevent later users of this layout environment - to
not use \starttables ... \stoptables I naturally would like for this
to work in the text region as well.
This works fine and as advertised (well mostly, see below) as long as
the table does not spill over to the next page. In which case, things
start to look very messy, indeed.
From my (simple) point of view it looks like ConTeXt gets confused
about which format to use for which table and tries to do them all at
the same place or something.
Any chance to get this fixed ?
Use the following setup for the header, it use natural tables.
\startsetups pagehead
\bTABLE[option=stretch,strut=no,offset=.5em]
\bTR
\bTD[align={right,lohi},width=4cm] left \eTD
\bTD[align={middle,lohi},width=6cm] middle \eTD
\bTD[align={left,lohi},width=4cm] right \eTD
\eTR
\eTABLE
\stopsetups
Thanks in advance
Carsten
P.S.: There is an additional bug (also concerning the single page
version and not related to having a table in the pagehead), which
puts in an extra (empty) gap in between the end of the tablebody and
the tablefoot when the tablefoot starts with \HL (and there is no \HL
at the end of tablebody).
Things work when putting the \HL at the end of the tablebody, but
then
no \HL will be put on top of the foot for any intermediate pages of
the table, which is certainly not what one would usually want in this
case.
I have no solution for this.
Anyway, here a simple version of this to demonstrate the effect(s)
\setuppagenumbering[location=]
\setupheadertexts[\setups{pagehead}][][\setups{pagehead}][]
\startsetups[pagehead]
\SetTableToWidth{\makeupwidth}
\starttable[|p(40mm)|p(60mm)|p(40mm)|]
\HL
\VL \leftaligned{left} \VL \midaligned{middle} \VL
\rightaligned{right} \VL\SR
\HL
\stoptable
Re: [NTG-context] Bug: Messy results when using table in head and multi-page tables in text
Dear Wolfgang,
first, I _really_ appreciate your effort. Unfortunately, for me
\framed is not likely to do the job, as the header is a bit more
complicated in real-life (I told you so ;-).
And yes, actually, using framed had been my very first approach as the
original LaTeX layout had been using \begin{picture} ...
\end{picture}. Therefore, I thought at that time going the \framed
route should do the trick
Here is an (still simplified) example why I don't think it would
\setuplayout[%
width=160mm,
topspace=10mm,
header=35mm,
headerdistance=5mm,
]
\setuppagenumbering[location=]
\setupheadertexts[\setups{pagehead}][][\setups{pagehead}][]
\startsetups[pagehead]
\setupframed[offset=3pt]
\setupcombinations[distance=-\linewidth,width=160mm,align=no]
\dontleavehmode
\startcombination[3]
{\framed[align={right,lohi},height=27mm,width=35mm\relax]
{ LOGO } }
{\framed[align={right,lohi},width=35mm\relax]
{left} }
{\framed[align={middle,lohi},height=27mm,width=80mm\relax]
{titel } }
{\framed[align={middle,lohi},width=80mm\relax]
{middle} }
{\framed[align={right,lohi},height=27mm,width=45mm\relax]
{other stuff} }
{\framed[align={middle,lohi},width=45mm\relax]
{Page:~\pagenumber\ of \lastpage}}
\stopcombination
\stopsetups
\starttext
\input knuth
\stoptext
Again, as I am still new to ConTeXt, there might be a way to get rid
of the spaces between the frames, somehow. But I still would -- in the
real version -- also need some extra alignments within some cells and
in short this gets just more ugly with every further step.
I also had been thinking about going the metafun route. However, I
do need a simple, out of the box solution that even the greenest TeX
newbie could use and setup on all sorts of OS's ...
In short, I fear that is also not going to be a choice at the moment.
Open to suggestions
Yours
Carsten
Am 20.01.2008 um 17:18 schrieb Wolfgang Schuster:
next solution, framed:
\startsetups[pagehead]
\setupframed[strut=no,offset=.5em,height=1cm]
\dontleavehmode
\framed[align={right,lohi},width=\dimexpr(\textwidth/7)*2+\linewidth
\relax]{left} \hskip-\linewidth
\framed[align={middle,lohi},width=\dimexpr(\textwidth/7)*3\relax]
{middle} \hskip-\linewidth
\framed[align={left,lohi},width=\dimexpr(\textwidth/7)*2+\linewidth
\relax]{right} \stopsetups
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] place figures at the end of document
Dear Peter,
please be aware that I am still a ConTeXt newbie, therefore, I am not
sure if this is really the way things should be done, only that it
seems to work with up to a 999 figures (tested) and probably more ;-)
Nonetheless, the following code probably does the trick you were
looking for
It has the further benefit that only those figures with the option
[list] will go to the list and that you can do all the other tricks
with this list of figures that you can do with any sort of list.
Unfortunately you have to change all \placefigure to \PlaceFigure (or
some other name of your choosing for this macro)
Cheers
Carsten
%-- setting things up -
\definesorting[Figure][Figures]
\setupsorting[Figure][criterium=all]
\newcounter\FigureCounter
\def\PlaceFigure{\dodoubleempty\doPlaceFigure}
\def\doPlaceFigure[#1][#2]#3#4{
\ifsecondargument
\doifsamestringelse{#1}{list}{
\expanded{\Figure[\FigureCounter]{\noexpand\placefigure[#2]{#3}
{{#4}} }}
\increment\FigureCounter
}{
\placefigure[#1][#2]{#3}{#4}
}
\else
\placefigure[#2]{#3}{#4}
\fi
}
%-- the actual text -
\starttext
\dorecurse{100}{
\PlaceFigure[here][fig:\recurselevel]{Blackbox in text at level
\recurselevel}{\blackrule[width=6cm,height=4cm]}
\input knuth\par
\PlaceFigure[list][fig:\recurselevel]{Blackbox in list at level
\recurselevel}{\blackrule[width=6cm,height=4cm]}
}
\page
\placelistofFigures
\stoptext
On 18.01.2008 at 17:36 wrote Peter I. Hansen:
Hi,
Is there a way in ConTeXt to place figures (and other floats) at the
very end of the document?
More specifically I would like to keep on having to placefigure code
at the relevant place in the text where I would normally typeset with
the option [here], but sometimes readers want all figures moved to the
end of the document and it would be handy if this could be done by
changing a keyword.
thanks, Peter
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
[NTG-context] Bug or feature? Strange counter behaviour in macro
Hello everyone,
first off: I am new to ConTeXt (even if not so new to LaTeX)
and would like to transfer some of my old macros to ConTeXt...
I am well aware, that this means re-programming (most) of them.
So be it.
Furthermore, I am not sure if this is really the right way (read
ConTeXt Way) to do it.
It just looked like a good idea at the time ...
However, I just hit a snuff with the following:
If one places \NewIssue[Some Time] somewhere in the text, it should
result in a new (issue / timestamp) to be generated, which can then
placed in a list of issues / changes.
I also want to be able to make use of the last value Issue to be
placed in the header, same goes for the last timestamp
Now this is how I went out to do this in ConTeXt (maybe wrongly so?)
following the manual and some examples on contextwiki
%--- code below ---
\definesynonyms[Issue][issues][\IssueText][\IssueDate]
\setupsynonyms[Issue][criterium=all]
\newcounter\IssueCounter
\definenumber[IssueNumber]
\def\TempIssueText{%
%% This was the (seemingly) only way to get any value beside 0
%% from \getnumber within doAddIssue
%% Original place for
\incrementnumber[IssueNumber]
Issue~\getnumber[IssueNumber]:
}
\def\NewIssue{\dosingleargument\doNewIssue}
\def\doNewIssue[#1]{%
\increment\IssueCounter % This one works correctly.
%% Alternative place for
%\incrementnumber[IssueNumber]
%% if placed here instead of in \TempIssueText
%% a DIFFERENT, but still wrong result comes out
%% that is: Debug shows the right progression,
%% but ALL Issue x Numbers are set to the last one
Debug: \IssueCounter / \getnumber[IssueNumber]%
%% but alas I can't seem to make this work with the following lines :-(
\doifempty{#1}{\Issue[\IssueCounter]{\TempIssueText}{\currentdate}}
\doifnotempty{#1}{\Issue[\IssueCounter]{\TempIssueText}{#1}}
%% Note: Using \dofiemptyelse gives the same result,
%% I just wanted to make sure here that I am /really/ not calling it
twice,
%% somehow, by being able to disable each case, separately and
definitely.
-- \IssueCounter / \getnumber[IssueNumber]
\crlf
}
% -- -- -- -- -- --
\starttext
\NewIssue[January 9, 2008]
\NewIssue[January 10, 2008]
\NewIssue % January 11, 2008
List of issue \# and dates:
\placelistofissues \blank
\IssueDate{\IssueCounter} % produces correct result in either case
\stoptext
%--- code above ---
Result as printed out by original version
--
Debug: 1/ 0 – 1/ 0
Debug: 2/ 0 – 2/ 0
Debug: 3/ 0 – 3/ 0
List of issue # and dates:
Issue 2: January 9, 2008
Issue 4: January 10, 2008
Issue 6: January 11, 2008
January 11, 2008
--
So while \IssueCounter is updated correctly and used with the right
values,
\getnumber[IssueNumber] always sees / reports the original value
However, the value in \placelistofissues are twice what they should be?!
This is changed if one places \incrementnumber[IssueNumber] INSIDE of
\doAddIssue
Here, \getnumber[IssueNumber] does report the right value (same as
IssueCounter)
However, in that case the result looks like this:
Result as printed out by alternative version
--
Debug: 1/ 1 – 1/ 1
Debug: 2/ 2 – 2/ 2
Debug: 3/ 3 – 3/ 3
List of issue # and dates:
Issue 3: January 9, 2008
Issue 3: January 10, 2008
Issue 3: January 11, 2008
January 11, 2008
In short, while now the value of \getnumber[IssueNumber] is correct
before and after,
its value in \placelistofissues is always the last value, i.e. equal
to the total number of issues.
And this does NOT even change, when one replaces
Issue~\getnumber[IssueNumber]:
Issue~\IssueCounter:
in \TempIssueText
So for some reason, \TempIssueText is called twice ? How? Where?
Unfortunately, my ConTeXt.foo is not yet good enough to make it over
the TeX.bar here
as I haven't found a way to make this work (preferably with
\IssueCounter
as all this \XXXnumber stuff does not seem to work the way I think it
should, anyway...)
And yes, ANY help with this is very welcome by now
Sincerely
Carsten
P.S: Context version is 2007.01.12 15:56 / TeXlive / OS X
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] Bug or feature? Strange counter behaviour in macro
Hi Aditya,
thanks for taking the time to answer this. And yes, I looked at what
ConTeXt has already built in.
On 12.01.2008 at 18:44 wrote Aditya Mahajan:
I haven't looked at your code below. First check if one the in-built
stuctural environments of ConTeXt do what you want.
As a matter of fact, I am using the following for all the heavy stuff
(implementing that in LaTeX is/was a REAL pain)
\definesynonyms[Issue][issues][\IssueText][\IssueDate]
\setupsynonyms[Issue][criterium=all]
\Issue[1]{Issue 1:}{Some Date}
\Issue[2]{Issue 2:}{\currentdate}
and if I just put the values in by hand, it works like a champ. Sorted
list and all. ;-D
Took me less than 5 minutes to implement (read: find in the manual).
Just gonna _love_ ConTeXt for that!
Now, with such a nice success (and because I have much more counter
stuff on the way)
I was feeling lucky ...
and spent the next 5 hours figuring out / searching on the web / going
over the source
how to have the number for each issue placed automatically, every
time a new issue date is set.
Yes, sure, I could just _write_ that in, but then I would have to
check myself,
which number is exactly the one I need, and not have the computer do
it for me.
But, hey where is the fun in that? ;-)
What this all burns down is, that I /really/ would like to understand,
how I can pass a value from a counter as (constant) argument to a self-
defined function. As that seems to be the core of the matter/problem
here.
Any suggestions?
Cheers
Carsten
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] Bug or feature? Strange counter behaviour in macro
Hi Aditya,
yes, looking at the .tuo did the trick. :-D
I had tried things with expanded already, but at that time I still had
{\expanded{\Issue[\IssueCounter]{Issue~\IssueCounter:}{\currentdate}}}
as command. Which does NOT work (due to the tilde ~ resulting in an
error message then)
The rest was actually fine. Now, without it (i.e. ~) it works!
...
{\expanded{\Issue[\IssueCounter]{Issue: \IssueCounter:}{\currentdate}}}
...
Thanks a lot, that had me seriously baffled ;-)
Carsten
On 12.01.2008 at 23:29 wrote Aditya Mahajan:
Hi Carsten,
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008, Carsten Fechtmann wrote:
What this all burns down is, that I /really/ would like to
understand,
how I can pass a value from a counter as (constant) argument to a
self-
defined function. As that seems to be the core of the matter/problem
here.
You need to understand how synonyms work. It writes enteries to the
tuo
file, and then uses that in the second pass to sort things. One way to
make sure that you have the correct entry in the tuo file is to use
expanded:
\definesynonyms[Issue][issues][\IssueText][\IssueDate]
\setupsynonyms[Issue][criterium=all]
\newcounter\IssueCounter
\def\NewIssue{\dosingleargument\doNewIssue}
\def\doNewIssue[#1]%
{\increment\IssueCounter
%Debug: \IssueCounter / \getnumber[IssueNumber]%
\doifelsenothing{#1}
{\expanded{\Issue[\IssueCounter]{\IssueCounter}{\currentdate}}}
{\expanded{\Issue[\IssueCounter]{\IssueCounter}{#1
% Compare the tuo file with and without expanded and you will know
what is
% happening.
\starttext
\NewIssue[January 9, 2008]
\NewIssue[January 10, 2008]
\NewIssue % January 11, 2008
List of issue \# and dates:
\placelistofissues \blank
\IssueDate{\IssueCounter} % produces correct result in either case
\stoptext
Aditya
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
___
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
