- ntg-context - NTG Mailing Lists

Can modes be used for content control?
by Idris Samawi Hamid ادريس سماوي ح امد 17 Nov '21

17 Nov '21

Dear gang, For creating/authoring content in ConTeXt: Can modes or the like be used for content control? For example, someone wants to write at least two versions of a book managed from a single file. So, e.g., we may have a) abridged content b) unabridged content - includes a) c) abridged content + translation d) unabridged content + translation [:] One can author and organize this in XML - pre-ConteXt - but perhaps one prefers to write in ConTeXt (take advantage of shortcuts etc.). So maybe \defineparagraphs[unabridged] \defineparagraphs[abridged] \defineparagraphs[translation] Then one authors the complete work in a single project, but you can produce a variety of versions, depending on the mode chosen: \definemode[unabridged] etc. Can one do this in context? If so, does anyone have some working example of how to do it? Might even be worth a MyWay if not too unwieldy.. Thank you in advance! Best wishes Idris -- Idris Samawi Hamid, Professor Department of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80512

5 12

figure not added in current latest
by Pablo Rodriguez 17 Nov '21

17 Nov '21

Hi Hans, I have the following sample: \setuppapersize[S6] \startbuffer[flag] \setuppapersize[S6] \starttext \startmakeup[page][align=center] \dontleavehmode \externalfigure[uk-flag.pdf][width=.8\textwidth] \stopmakeup \stoptext \stopbuffer \starttext \startmakeup[page][align=center] \dontleavehmode \typesetbuffer[flag] \stopmakeup \stoptext The image can be found at https://pdf.ousia.tk/uk-flag.pdf. Compiling it with latest from 2021.11.11 19:24, the final PDF contains the flag. I’m not sure whether there was another version (before the current latest) that I haven’t copied. If I compile it with latest from 2021.11.16 22:36, the final PDF has no flag. This happens even if I remove the patch for lpdf-pde.lmt you sent me. The case above also happens when using \externalfigure with some images. Just in case it might help, I downloaded the SVG file and ConTeXt invoked Inkscape to convert it to PDF: I’m afraid this might be a bug. Many thanks for your help, Pablo

1 0

Checking for a macro in a string without expanding it
by Joey McCollum 17 Nov '21

17 Nov '21

As the subject of this question suggests, this is really more of a question about expansion control (a topic that is still a bit obscure to me). Suppose I have a macro \inner that expects a single argument or an assignment of parameters in brackets. For my purposes, I don't want this macro to do anything when it is typeset, so I'll just define it as empty: ``` \def\inner[#1]\empty ``` Now suppose I have another macro \outer that invokes this macro with some specific input and sets some plain text after it: ``` \def\outer{\inner[123] etc.} ``` What I'd like to do is parse the argument of \inner in \outer. I was hoping that a string search in Lua would work, but I'm not having any luck. A minimal (non)-working example is included below: ``` \def\inner[#1]\empty \def\outer{\inner[123] etc.} \startluacode local userdata = userdata or {} function userdata.parseinner(str) local innerparams = "" if string.find(str, "\\inner(%b[])") then i, j = string.find(str, "\\inner(%b[])") innerparams = string.sub(str, i+1, j-1) -- we just want the content inside the brackets end context(innerparams) return end \stopluacode \def\parseinner#1{\ctxlua{userdata.parseinner([==[#1]==])}} \starttext Testing:\blank \parseinner{\outer} \stoptext ``` My problem is that when I pass \outer to the \parseinner macro, it gets fully expanded, so there isn't anything left to match "\\inner%b[]". Is there a way to expand \outer when I pass it to the \parseinner macro without also expanding the \inner macro inside it? Or is there some other preferred way of doing this? Joey

4 7

new upload, new trickery
by Hans Hagen 16 Nov '21

16 Nov '21

Hi, Among the 'can they be made better' candidates in the engine are \vadjust and \local[left|right]box primitives that are not really used in context (okay, vadjust is used in mkii). The \vadjust vertical injector can be illustrated with \starttext \ignorespaces\input tufte \removeunwantedspaces we want a break before this line \vadjust pre {\break}% \ignorespaces\input tufte \removeunwantedspaces \page \ignorespaces\input tufte \removeunwantedspaces we want seperate lines now \leftparbox{\vadjust post {\break}}% \ignorespaces\input tufte \removeunwantedspaces \resetleftparbox{} \stoptext It's a signal that injects something in a vertical list without interupting the horizontal text flow. One can inject before (pre) or after (post which is default). New is that we can also influence the order: after vs before preceding \vadjust in the same line. Also new is that deeply nested adjustments can migrate (so the hole los: marks, inserts and vadjust are now in sync) which is demonstrated with the next example: \starttext \showstruts \input tufte \removeunwantedspaces\space \localleftbox par {% \hbox to 0pt{% \llap{L}% \vadjust{\strut\blackrule[width=1cm,color=red]}% \hbox{\vadjust pre{\strut\blackrule[width=1cm,color=green]}}% }\hss }% \localrightbox par {}% \input tufte \removeunwantedspaces\space \vadjust pre {\strut BEFORE 1}% \vadjust pre {\strut BEFORE 2}% \vadjust before {\strut AFTER 1}% \vadjust before {\strut AFTER 2}% \ignorespaces \input tufte \stoptext Indeed it looks bad (ugly) but it illustrates the idea. What makes vadjust sort of useless for content is that it messes up spacing (but if there is real demand and usage i can sort that out at some point, maybe some new options or so). Thsi example also brings us to local boxes: \showframe \starttext \showmakeup[hbox] \startnarrower[2*left] \raggedleft {\localleftbox par {L1}\input tufte \par} \stopnarrower \blank \startnarrower[2*middle] \raggedcenter {\localrightbox par {R1}\input tufte \par} \stopnarrower \blank \stoptext New is the par keyword that forces the setting to be applied from the first line downards (fyio: these commands, when display set registers, when inline they set registers and inject a node). Watch out: one needs to use grouping in order not to bleed into other mechanisms. Also new is that we can query the content of these registers using \the, as in: \dorecurse{10}{ \showboxes \localleftbox{\ruledhbox {\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.0]}}% \localleftbox{\ruledhbox {\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.1]}\the\localleftbox}% \localleftbox{\ruledhbox {\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.2]}\the\localleftbox}% \localleftbox{\ruledhbox {\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.3]}\the\localleftbox}% % \localrightbox{\ruledhbox {\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[R #1.0]}}% \localrightbox{\the\localrightbox\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[R #1.1]}}% \localrightbox{\the\localrightbox\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[R #1.2]}}% \localrightbox{\the\localrightbox\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont[R #1.3]}}% % \localrightbox{}% \samplefile{tufte} } Flushing permits us to append and prepend but it's still ugly so that is why we now have a new interface (context layer on top of engine): \dorecurse{10}{ \showboxes % \resetleftparbox \resetrightparbox % \prependleftparbox {\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.0]}}% \prependleftparbox {\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.1]}}% \prependleftparbox {\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.2]}}% \prependleftparbox {\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[L #1.3]}}% % \appendrightparbox{\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[R #1.0]}}% \appendrightparbox{\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[R #1.1]}}% \appendrightparbox{\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont\setstrut\strut[R #1.2]}}% \appendrightparbox{\ruledhbox{\smallinfofont[R #1.3]}}% % \samplefile{tufte} } But as this is not really user friendly, there is more: a mechanism for hooking in handlers. \definelocalboxes [linenumber] [command=\LeftNumber, location=left, width=3em, style=\bs, color=darkred] \definelocalboxes [linenumbertwo] [linenumber] [command=\RightNumber, location=right, width=6em, style=\bf, color=darkgreen] \definelocalboxes [linetext] [command=\LeftText, location=lefttext, style=\bs, color=darkblue] \definelocalboxes [linetexttwo] [linetext] [command=\RightText, location=righttext, style=\bf, color=darkgray] % just using the content % \protected\def\LeftNumber {\hbox to \localboxesparameter{width}{\strut\box\localboxcontentbox\hss)}} % \protected\def\RightNumber{\hbox to \localboxesparameter{width}{\strut(\hss\box\localboxcontentbox)}} % using the provided line number: % \def\LineNumberL{\the\localboxlinenumber} % \def\LineNumberR{\the\localboxlinenumber} % using a tex counter % \newcount\MyLineNumberL % \newcount\MyLineNumberR % \def\LineNumberL{\global\advance\MyLineNumberL\plusone\the\MyLineNumberL} % \def\LineNumberR{\global\advance\MyLineNumberR\plusone\the\MyLineNumberR} % using proper counters \definecounter[MyLineNumberL] \definecounter[MyLineNumberR] \setupcounter[MyLineNumberL][numberconversion=characters] \setupcounter[MyLineNumberR][numberconversion=romannumerals] \def\LineNumberL{\incrementcounter[MyLineNumberL]\convertedcounter[MyLineNumberL]} \def\LineNumberR{\incrementcounter[MyLineNumberR]\convertedcounter[MyLineNumberR]} \protected\def\LeftNumber {\hbox to \localboxesparameter{width}{\strut(\LineNumberL\hss)}} \protected\def\RightNumber{\hbox to \localboxesparameter{width}{\strut(\hss\LineNumberR)}} \protected\def\LeftText #1{#1\quad} \protected\def\RightText#1{\quad#1} \showframe \starttext \start \localbox[linenumber]{}% \localbox[linenumbertwo]{}% \localbox[linetext]{L}% \startlocalbox[linetexttwo] R \stoplocalbox \dorecurse{100}{ \samplefile{tufte} \par } \stop If you play a bit with these low level mechanism the luametatex / context combination now permits weird applications (which for sure some of you will (ab)use). The above example shows how to implement line numbers (there are drawbacks compared to the existing mechanisms) and other stuff in the margins and text edges but the most important aspect is that when the content in these boxes has width, it will be taken into account in the par builder because that is what this is about: these local boxes are taken into acount when breaking lines. When the handlers kick in, you have \localboxattribute : more for internal use \localboxlinenumber : as the par builder sees it \localboxwidth : the local box width \localboxoffset : the total distance to the edge \localboxleftskip : the effective leftskip \localboxrightskip : the effective rightskip \localboxlefthang : the current shape related value \localboxrighthang : the current shape related value \localboxindent : only first line \localboxparfillleftskip : effective value (onky last line) \localboxparfillrightskip : effective value (only last line) \localboxovershoot : overfull compensation most of these relate to normalized lines and as such there is plenty to play with. Others can be seen in the examples. I might add some more control to both these 'injection' mechanism because directly out of the (pdftex/omega/luatex) they are not that useful (which is probably also why we don't use them.) These are cheap extensions so they don't really influence runtime much, so .. when not used ... no harm done. I really have no clue how useful this is. I need to ponder this usage: \definelocalboxes [linetextA] [command=\LeftTextA, location=lefttext, style=\bs, color=darkblue] \protected\def\LeftTextA#1{\llap{#1}\quad} \definelocalboxes [linetextB] [command=\LeftTextB, location=left, style=\bs, color=darkgreen] \protected\def\LeftTextB{\llap{\unhbox\localboxcontentbox}\quad} \starttext \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \leftparbox {\red \bf keyword}HERE\leftparbox{} \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \blank {\dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \leftparbox {\red \bf keyword}test \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 }} \blank {\dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \localbox[linetextA]{keyword}HERE \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 }} {\dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \localbox[linetextB]{keyword}HERE \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 }} {\dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \localbox[linetextB]{keyword 1}HERE1 \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 } \localbox[linetextB]{keyword 2}HERE2 \dorecurse{10}{some text #1 }} \stoptext so there's always so echallenge left. Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

3 3

unknown script
by skyhorse＠gmx.us 16 Nov '21

16 Nov '21

OS: Linux (Ubuntu 20.04.3) /opt/context-lmtx and all directories and files in it are owned by user and not root. I've had this problem before but forgot how to deal with it and neglected to make a not of it. I deleted all old context files and did a fresh install of context-lmtx without su priveledges today. When attempting to typeset a lmtx source file I get an 'unknown script' error. Here's what pops up on my display screen: $ context simple-example.lmtx resolvers | resolving | configuration files already identified resolvers | resolving | loading configuration file 'selfautoparent:/texmf/web2c/texmfcnf.lua' resolvers | resolving | resolvers | resolving | locating list of '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' (runtime) (tree:////opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf) resolvers | methods | resolving, method 'locators', how 'uri', handler 'tree', argument 'tree:////opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | trees | locator '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' found resolvers | resolving | hash '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' appended resolvers | resolving | resolvers | methods | resolving, method 'generators', how 'uri', handler 'file', argument '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | expansions | using cached scan of path '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf', branch '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | methods | resolving, method 'generators', how 'uri', handler 'file', argument '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | expansions | using cached scan of path '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf', branch '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | resolving | resolvers | resolving | not saving runtime tree '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | resolving | not saving runtime tree '/opt/context-lmtx/tex/texmf' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'mtx-context.lua' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'mtx-contexts.lua' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'mtx-context.lua' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'mtx-t-context.lua' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'mtx-t-contexts.lua' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'mtx-t-context.lua' resolvers | resolving | remembered file 'context.lua' mtxrun | unknown script 'context.lua' or 'mtx-context.lua' # END Can anyone shed some light on how this should be handled? Thanks ---------

2 1

Footnotes in margins
by Marcus Vinicius Mesquita 16 Nov '21

16 Nov '21

Dear list, When running the MWE below, the first footnote does not appear. What am I missing? \starttext \inmargin{Foo\footnote{Foo 1.}}Foo\footnote{Foo 2.} \stoptext ConTeXt version: 2021.11.13 Regards Marcus Vinicius -- Todas as coisas fatigam o corpo, salvo a música, que não fatiga nem o corpo nem seus membros, por ser descanso da alma, primavera do coração, distração do aflito, entretenimento do solitário, e viático do viajante. Kunnâsh al-Hâ'ik (Cancioneiro de al-Hâ'ik)

3 3

new upload
by Hans Hagen 16 Nov '21

16 Nov '21

Hi, I uploaded a new lmtx versions. It mostly concerns new math lfg file functionality (and control) that Mikael Sundqvist and I are currently working on so there might be subtle differences in math, which is, unless there are bugs, intentional and for the best. At some point there will be additional test files in the distribution and a chapter on fonts in the math manual (the deadline is next years ctx meeting). If you have wishes wrt fonts you can tell us and we'll take them into account (if possible) but we need proper (real) minimal examples, and not for only one font as we're looking at: cambria (the reference font, very little tweaking needed) modern (which has some properties different from other gyre fonts) modernlatin (the boldened aka bachotex version) dejavu (a gyre font but different from other gyre fonts) pagella (a gyre font, all have subtle differences) schola (a gyre font, all have subtle differences) termes (a gyre font, all have subtle differences) bonum (a gyre font, all have subtle differences) lucida (commercial but rather cheap from tug) xits (is that one still used?) libertinus (a mixed bag) stix-two (a mixed bag) asana (we might drop it because of quality reasons) ebgaramond (this one is quite cambria conforming) minion (tricky because commercial and not generally available) Maybe later the newlatin modern will get a lfg too but it's beta and we 'modernlatin' anyway which uses our normal lm lgf file as it's A runtime derived font and therefore fully compatible. The bold (heavy) math fonts also are dealt with automagically. For practical reasons we might freeze fonts in the distribution and only update when explicitly checked for changes (and/or I might cook up version support in the lfg file assuming version checking is doable as often version strings are somewhat messy). We're not that bound to conventions (in the perspective of tex usage) and can "fix" them once and for all (read: we can divert from how these fonts are currently tuned for usage and expectations in e.g. latex and plain tex) so feel free to suggest esthetical pleasing options. If needed we can add variants (for which we can extend the lfg format). We also have plenty of yet unused (detailed) control in the engine. We can for instance have specific parameter sets / finetuning defined in the lfg files too but I don't know how useful and in demand that is (Mikael is looking into that). (I'm sure Aditya has some wishes. We'll deal with Euler later as that's a virtual mix and virtual opentype might be redone later because we can simply matters a bit due to the fact that we have some more and better trickery wrt virtual fonts now.) More in due time (as it's a tedious and somewhat boring job that demands lots of testing and investigation), Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

space handling in \type
by Henning Hraban Ramm 16 Nov '21

16 Nov '21

Hi, \starttext \quotation{\type{\CONTEXT\ }} \stoptext gives “\CONTEXT \” i.e. the space moved. Why? Bug? Hraban

2 1

Re: [NTG-context] directsetup vs setups
by Wolfgang Schuster 15 Nov '21

15 Nov '21

Rik Kabel schrieb am 15.11.2021 um 22:51: > > Wolfgang, > > Can you expand on the following statements from your reply? > > You can run Hans example with MkIV and the differences should be > even bigger because the check for [] is slower here while in LMTX > it's a engine feature. The main difference in LMTX is a extra > expansion for \setup compared to \directsetup. > > there is no difference between \setup and \directsetup > > Are you saying: > > 1. When [] are used with \setup, expansion of the contents is done > differently than when {} are used. It doesn't matter which form you use for \setup. What I'm trying to say is that \setup is slower (or better was slower in MkIV) than \directsetup because \setup has to check first if the name is passed within brackets or as normal argument in braces. The code in MkIV would look similar to this: \def\setup {\doifnextcharelse[ \setup_brackets \setup_braces} \def\setup_brackets[#1]% {\directsetup{#1}} \def\setup_braces#1% {\directsetup{#1}} > 2. There is no significant processing time difference between \setup > and \directsetup. > When I run the following example on my machine \starttext \startsetups [dummy] \stopsetups \testfeatureonce{100000}{\setup {test}} \elapsedtime \par \testfeatureonce{100000}{\directsetup{test}} \elapsedtime \par \stoptext I get these times. # MkIV \setup : 0.136s \directsetup : 0.079s # LMTX \setup : 0.083 seconds \directsetup : 0.071 seconds Add additional stuff in the setup environment and the difference between \setup and \directsetup doesn't matter anymore. > 3. There is additional expansion performed for \setup compared to > \directsetup. > Although this isn't completely true (but very close) the definition for \setup in LMTX is like this: \def\setup#1{\directsetup{#1}} > 4. Under LMTX, because {} and [] handling overhead is so similar, the > most visible processing time difference to users is from the > difference in expansion between \setup and \directsetup. > > I think you are saying that 2, 3, and 4 are true, but that 1 is not true. > > If that is the case, can you provide an example that demonstrates the > difference in expansion between \setup and \directsetup? > > Also, as far as expansion, is \fastsetup like \setup or like \directsetup? > \setup and \directsetup are similar. \fastsetup is like the name implies a faster version which ignores grid mode and doesn't care whether the requested environment even exists. > My simple testing shows no difference between setup, directsetup, and > fastsetup for namespace set and reset. Is it your understanding that > they all behave the same? > No, \fastsetup behaves different because it leaves \relax\empty in the input when you pass the name of a not existing environment. It shouldn't matter in normal usage but below are two examples. Example 1: \starttext \tex{directsetup} \scratchcounter 12\directsetup{unknown_a}34 \the\scratchcounter \tex{fastsetup} \scratchcounter 12\fastsetup{unknown_b}34 \the\scratchcounter \stoptext Example 2: \starttext \normalexpanded{\noexpand\firstoftwoarguments\directsetup{unknown_a}xy} \normalexpanded{\noexpand\firstoftwoarguments\fastsetup{unknown_b}xy} \stoptext Wolfgang

1 0

directsetup vs setups
by Rik Kabel 15 Nov '21

15 Nov '21

Hello list, Can anyone provide a description of, or a point to a description of, the differences between setups= and directsetup= for including setups? I searched the list archive and the documents and found nothing. (That may indicate my level of search foo, but nonetheless I am in need of help with this.) -- Rik

5 5