On Wed, 4 May 2011, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 4-5-2011 12:52, Paul Menzel wrote:
I think the question is the following. Does ConTeXt want to define all
commands amstex/amsmath defines?
You need to convince Aditya then as he has to make up that list.
I think that ConTeXt should be feature compatible with amstex; not
necessarily syntax compatible. Although syntax compatibility eases the
translation of old amstex documents to ConTeXt, it is not a good long
term solution.
So, the question remains, is this feature (changing the meaning of
\dotsb etc) by authors? If so, we can add an option to \setupmathematics
or a dedicated \setupdots (or something similar) command.
Aditya
___________________________________________________________________________________
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
___________________________________________________________________________________
