[NTG-context] unsubscribe

On 18. Aug 2023, at 20:17, Carlos wrote:

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 06:20:29PM +0200, Mikael Sundqvist wrote:

...

Hi,

It is extremely difficult to follow what you write.

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:43 AM Carlos wrote:

...

If I have the following, with these linebreaks as in:

{\par But a system cannot be successful if it is too strongly influenced by a single person. {\obeylines Once the initial design is complete and fairly robust, the real test begins as people with many different viewpoints undertake their own experiments.}}

Is that the complete document? What do you have in mind with obeying lines in the middle of a paragraph?

it's the only possible way off the top of my head to circumvent body font size with a given width, while keeping both: the kern of \TeX\ and the double spacing that lmtx injects following a sentence, within sanity check, hence the nonfrenchspacing

The separation of any of these four components would have hurt T E X sig­ nificantly. If I had not participated fully in all these activities, literally hundreds of improvements would never have been made, because I would never have thought of them or perceived why they were important. But a system cannot be successful if it is too strongly influenced by a single person. Once the initial design is

...

...

and opted to load another font, other than cmr that is, a \frenchspacing approach wouldn't be further required

cmr? Not used in ConTeXt for a long time. (And what does the changing of font have to do with this?)

latin modern.

...

...

Bear with me here, in the current state, for example, and as long as say

«…person.␣{\obeylines Once the initial is complete…» though feasible enough, leaves any prior \␣ at the mercy of whatever fontsize and/or set width happens to be. And this is just plain wrong.

What?

...

Likewise, if a word sequence such as \TeX\ occurs as in {\ss The separation of any of these four components would have hurt \TeX\ significantly. }

Likewise what?

...

The next sentence: «If I had not participated…» does not get any \nofrenchspacing which is equally and doubly problematic. It shows lack of consistency. And this ought not to be an ‹either› ‹or› scenario. But rather, an and conjunctional construct. It fails both ways.

Consistency of what? Spacing? Where? Can you make a complete example? (You can show space amount with \showmakup[space])

yes. and showmakeup displays: .SP:10.945 If

rather than for example with: .SP:5.235 OnceSP:3.926 theSP:3.926 initial SP:3.926 designSP:3.926 is

and

:3.586 THK:-1.853 H__E X HK:-1.390 SP:3.586 sig­RH:0.000 IR:0.000 RS:0.000 LH:0.000 H__nificantlyLS:0.000BS:6.565

and here's your example:

\setuplayout[width=16cm] \showmakeup

\starttext

Thus, I came to the conclusion that the designer of a new system must not only be the implementer and first large||scale user; the designer should also write the first user manual. \setupbodyfont[12.895pt]

{\ss The separation of any of these four components would have hurt \TeX\ significantly. If I had not participated fully in all these activities, literally hundreds of improvements would never have been made, because I would never have thought of them or perceived why they were important.\par}

Do you see that width of 16cm? That's what throws it off

but then again, anything less than that 12.895 font size, throws off the kern of \TeX\ too.

As a result, I can't use any lower font size, before everything, including kerning of \TeX\ and spaces after sentences, are completely off.

I mean. obeylines serve a better function than having extra spaces all over with no end in sight, really.

...

...

Furthermore, with the same token, if width is specified with a

\setuplayout[width=15cm]

OK, here the game changes...

...

Anything less than 12.895pt, especifically for that use case, wwould throw anything, particularly control sequences such as \TeX\ out of whack, and conversely, once a value of that very pt or pica or whatever is lowered, it brings that nonfrenchspacing right back on. And if width increments occur, then it follows that any control sequence kerning also gets thrown off as a result.

Of course the width influences the spacing. That is how the paragraph builder works (and really, why it often looks good).

...

It seems so far, that with lmtx, any standalone file, document, minimal working example that does not load cmr at the outset does not produce an acceptable outcome either. By saying acceptable I meant to say it namely from a typographical point of view. Nothing else.

I have no clue of what you talk about here.

...

from the TeXbook 380-381

«\obeylines doesn’t say ‘\def^^M{\par}’, so we must make any desired changes to \par before invoking \obeylines. (2) The \uncatcodespecials operation changes a space to category 12; but the \tt font has the character ‘␣’ in the ⟨space⟩ position, so we don’t really want ␣12 . (3) The \obeyspaces macro in Appendix B merely changes the ⟨space⟩ character to category 13; active character ␣13 has been defined to be the same as \space, a macro that expands to ␣10 . This is usually what is desired; for example, it means that spaces in constructions like ‘\hbox to 10 pt {...}’ won’t cause any trouble. But in our application it has an undesirable effect, because it produces spaces that are affected by the space factor. To defeat this feature, it’s necessary either to say \frenchspacing or to redefine ␣13 to be the same as \␣. The latter alternative is better, because the former will discard spaces at the beginning of each line.»

«In theory, this seems like it ought to work; but in practice, it fails in two ways. One rather obvious failure—at least, it becomes obvious when the macro is tested—is that all the empty lines of the file are omitted. The reason is that the \par command at the end of an empty line doesn’t start up a new paragraph, because it occurs in vertical mode. The other failure is not as obvious, because it occurs much less often: The \tt fonts contain ligatures for Spanish punctuation, so the sequences ?‘ and !‘ will be printed as ¿ and ¡ respectively. Both of these defects can be cured by inserting

and

«When INITEX creates a brand new TEX, all characters have a space factor code of 1000, except that the uppercase letters ‘A’ through ‘Z’ have code 999. (This slight difference is what makes punctuation act differently after an uppercase letter; do you see why?) Plain TEX redefines a few of these codes using the \sfcode primitive, which is similar to \catcode (see Appendix B); for example, the instructions \sfcode‘)=0 \sfcode‘.=3000 make right parentheses “transparent” to the space factor, while tripling the stretcha- bility after periods. The \frenchspacing operation resets \sfcode‘. to 1000.»

Everything you cite above is very likely true for plain TeX, but maybe not for ConTeXt...

/Mikael

PS I do not think that your emails come out well. In order to get help, I would suggest a strategy that not so much only sounds as nagging and complaints. One thing that has been lacking is a clear explanation of what you really try to achieve. ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : https://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

-- You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.

___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : https://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________