On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Hans Hagen <pra...@wxs.nl> wrote: > well, i use mkiv exclusively so that might be a sign that it's not that bad; > the main issue is to keep mkiv and luatex in sync
Good to know :) I would much prefer mkiv as well, as luatex seems much easier to grok than TeX. I have the luck to be entering typographical programming at a new stage. To what degree can luatex be relied on to accomplish all that TeX macros can? Does certain functionality still require TeX code? Re: documentation, Perhaps a thing to do in the meantime is start a section on the wiki where we do a command by command description of what different macros accomplish? (Apologies if I'm mincing terminologies here). Starting with the undocumented ones, but then working back and providing a bit of insight into use cases, such as what 'middle' may mean in a given instance, or that it's the best/required option (this point is still fuzzy to me). The command ref is just not insightful at my level of TeX. The thesis case study is concurrent typesetting of itself in HTML, ODT, and ConTeXt. Part of the idea is to interrogate different capabilities and comparing the processes between the formats for accomplishing the same thing (toggle-able sidenotes instead of footnote/endnote citations in ConTeXt vs HTML, for instance). So in that sense there should be more tutorial style content available for the wiki. I'll be pestering the list for help in those areas, I'm sure. ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________
