On Saturday 31 July 2010 23:25:24 Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
> I would start by looking at your comparison with \null, Ron :
> if you look at TB, p.~351, you will see that \null is defined
> as \hbox {}, which is a pretty unlikely value for a null mark.
Hi, Phil --
That turns out to be a red-herring -- since even:
\message{marks are \firstmark,\botmark^^J}
gives no joy...
--
Sending me something private?
Use my GPG public key: AD29415D
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
