Joachim Kreimer-de Fries wrote:
> - indeed, the marginal notes are numbered (I can live with the fact
> that this is not the kind numbering of notes (cf. footnotes) one -
> the reader - expects);
you can put anything there the way you want
> - indeed the notes are no longer printed one over the other.
>
> BUT:
>
> - the accent sign ( ยด ) placed in the text body before the next word
> following that wich is explained in the marginal note will not be
> accepted and understood by the readers. It must, of course, be a
> superscripts number (the same number as in the referencing marginal
> note).
i'm not sure what accent you mean, anyhow,
\def\domnote[#1]#2%
{\doglobal\increment\MyMarginalNote\plusone
\inmargin
{\MyMarginalNote:
\doifsomething{#1}
{\expanded{\textreference[#1]{\MyMarginalNote}}}%
#2}%
\high{\MyMarginalNote}}
this will put a footnote like number in the text
> AND:
>
> You won't really expect that someone outside the circle of you
> programmers who have developed ConTeXt, i. e. a simple (beginning)
> user of ConTeXt - even if highly willing to learn, is able to change
> this code in a way to get the wanted results (which I had illustrated
> with the pdf-file produced under extremly frustrating formating
> effort with OpenOffice Writer).
well, there are quite some users here who change code -)
it takes a while but at somepoint any user can define simple macros;
maybe the #1 is confusing but that's just the argument
> With two exceptions (\def and \setupinmargin) I did not find any of
> the used commands documented in "ConTEXt - the manual" or the
> "commands" quick reference of 2001. I could not verify in the http://
> texshow.contextgarden.net/
> because not available - as almost everytime. But from my last
> remember, when it - for once - was available, they are not in there,
> neither.
i could have used \definenumber or \definelabel but the shown code was a
quicky; the advantage of the other approach is that you can influence
their rendering
> On the one hand I have still the impression, that ConTeXt is a highly
> adaptable and flexible typesetting system within TeX (probably my
> intents with marginal notes as help for understanding texts could
> find a solution),
sure; the main probem is that everyone wants something slightly
different and we end up with many commands that need examples and
documentation and then get overseen ... the best resource for special
cases is still this mailing list since others may have needed you
rfeature before
> on the other hand I'm almost giving up with my intention, because the
> only program/system with wich I a had hope to resolve this problem is
> not configurable for me, because ... I'm not a programmer or software
> developer, because you ConTeXt-developers don't care enough about
> usable, applicable documentation, because the cultural, didactical
> value of the old (hand-) typesetting technique of marginal notes has
> come out of fashion, what ever...
well, there's actually quite some marginal stuff in context (you don't
wanna know what we need context for ourselves)
you should keep one thing in mind: tex is a 30 year old system (ok it
gets updated now) and some things are simply non trivial and marginal
notes are one of them (the stacking code is quite tricky)
concerning documentation ... if i had 60 hours in a day .... keeping up
with user demands, developments, my work etc etc takes time too
> N. B. I recommend the provision in ConTeXt for marginal notes in my
> intented sense warmly to you: they are an acquirement of civilization
> with big possibilities for the future and no other - at least no word
> processing program - is able to handle them yet in a acceptable manner!
>
> Nevertheless, be it pure curiousness or still persistant hope in
> acquiring the skills for ConTeXt, I would like to know:
>
> 1.
> in your sample code, Hans:
> between \starttext and \stoptext you write once (the first time of
> occurrence):
>> bla bla bla \mnote{xxx} bla bla
>
> but in the second time:
>> bla bla bla \mnote[foo]{xxx} bla bla bla
the [foo] is the optional cross reference; i thought that you might need
that
> and then again:
>
>> bla bla bla \mnote{xxx}
>
> Has the [foo] after the first \mnote any relevance and which?
>
> 2.
> the last row of your "document" text is:
>
>> in \in {note} [foo]
>
> in my pdf-output this appears as :
>
> "in note 2"
>
> This is not reasonable and desired (it should not appear). Was it a
> "slip of the pen" on your side or any purpose, if yes, which one?
huh? if you don't want it, just delete it; that;s the problem with
example code ... all users have different demands -)
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
