Am 20.03.2012 um 06:17 schrieb Wolfgang Schuster: > > Am 19.03.2012 um 22:27 schrieb Steffen Wolfrum: > >> Hi, >> >> are subfootnotes not yet rewritten, or did the syntax change? >> >> The following example expects 2.a but gives 2.1: >> >> \definestructureseparatorset [footnote][][] >> \definestructureconversionset[footnote][numbers,characters][numbers] >> \setupenumerations[footnote][numberconversionset=footnote,numberseparatorset=footnote] > > Use \setupnotation[footnote][…].
Right, thank you! The new footnote structure seems to tidy up and settle things neatly in \setupnote and \setupnotation. (eg. numbercommand now looks indeed more reasonable to me in setupnotation than it did before on setupnote) As it grows older ConTeXt gets more and more beautiful ;o) Steffen ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________
