On 1/5/2023 4:21 AM, Rik Kabel via ntg-context wrote:
On 2023-01-04 18:45, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 1/4/2023 11:10 PM, Rik Kabel via ntg-context wrote:
No change with the latest (2023.01.04).
Is this a problem with what I am doing, or a bug? well, it's new and not thtat tested ... we need to specify it
This\optionalspace fails unexpectedly with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace \emph{fails unexpectedly} with autoinsertedspace.\par
there can be more variants, like do we want to remove preceding spaces?
we already have:
This\optionalspace, fails unexpectedly with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace, \emph{fails unexpectedly} with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace fails unexpectedly with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace \emph{fails unexpectedly} with autoinsertedspace.\par
\optionalspace works correctly (that is, as I want it to) for all of my use cases under both MkIV and LMTX. Is there any reason that this should not be used in user documents?
depends ... it checks punctuation
I do wonder what characters are considered "punctuation" for the purpose of suppressing the next space. The standard six sentence termination characters (?!.:;,) are honored, and so are many others (quotation marks, including guillemot, square and curly braces, and parens). But sentence opening characters (¿¡) are as well. Vertical bars (|¦) and basic mathematical characters (+-=*) are not treated as punctuation. Where (in the source or manuals) are these to be found?
we use unicode properties (collected in char-def.lua)
As far as removing leading spaces, I do not see that it is necessary, but it may help create more readable sources.
Thank you for the fix.
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------