Re: [NTG-context] running headers on postponed makeup

2011-02-15 Thread Steffen Wolfrum
Am 22.12.2010 um 16:35 schrieb Hans Hagen: > On 22-12-2010 4:14, Steffen Wolfrum wrote: > >> wow, isn't this even worse?! > > depends on the view: consistency comes first, reasons why come next > >> Please look at your example (page 7) attached: >> >> Now you have >> Header = 1.1 A >> Section

Re: [NTG-context] running headers on postponed makeup

2010-12-20 Thread Hans Hagen
On 19-12-2010 11:31, Philipp Gesang wrote: On 2010-12-18<21:06:11>, Hans Hagen wrote: On 18-12-2010 6:12, Philipp Gesang wrote: after discovering postponed insertions I encountered a problem when combining it with the makeup mechanism I am so fond of. The next beta will have changes mark beh

Re: [NTG-context] running headers on postponed makeup

2010-12-19 Thread Philipp Gesang
On 2010-12-18 <21:06:11>, Hans Hagen wrote: > On 18-12-2010 6:12, Philipp Gesang wrote: > > >after discovering postponed insertions I encountered a problem > >when combining it with the makeup mechanism I am so fond of. > > The next beta will have changes mark behaviour: no reset in > everyforget

Re: [NTG-context] running headers on postponed makeup

2010-12-18 Thread Hans Hagen
On 18-12-2010 6:12, Philipp Gesang wrote: after discovering postponed insertions I encountered a problem when combining it with the makeup mechanism I am so fond of. The next beta will have changes mark behaviour: no reset in everyforget cases, and a fix for pages with no text. The first case

[NTG-context] running headers on postponed makeup

2010-12-18 Thread Philipp Gesang
Hi all, after discovering postponed insertions I encountered a problem when combining it with the makeup mechanism I am so fond of. ยทยทยท8< \definemakeup[my] \setupmakeup[my][ headerstate=start, page=yes, ] \startbuffer[mkup] \star