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?
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?
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.
--
Rik
___________________________________________________________________________________
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
___________________________________________________________________________________
