On Sat, Mar 27 2010, Michael Saunders wrote: > Notice that Yan Zhou isn't complaining that the docs are old. Our > problem is that they are sketchy and rambling, bits and pieces of this > and that without any systematic explanations. Often they are just > some unexplained code samples that communicate nothing (unless you > happen to be the guy who invented the language). I can't think of > one command that is fully explained along with all its possible > parameters. The wiki is better written, but even less complete. It > might not be possible to do better, but this is a huge obstacle to > anyone who actually wants to use ConTeXt. The docs hint at a lot of > features that sound better than LaTeX, but actually getting them to > work is a different story.
Hello Michael, See also here: http://archive.contextgarden.net/message/20100308.123128.f65942c8.en.html Cheers, Peter -- Contact information: http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/ ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
