On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:33:48PM +0100, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
>
> How is a framedtext more logical than a dictum or epigraph environment,
> with my solution you can also change the definition of the code to place
> the epigraph format without any change in the text while your framed text
> is always a framedtext (I know you can avoid this with a named framedtext)
> and changes to the layout require more work.
>
Thanks for the explanation.
It is not too logical, however, to define a dictum or epigraph *before* the
start of a new section or chapter. An author does not really think this way. Of
course, it is logical to define a dictum or epigraph environment that can be
used as in:
\startchapter [title=Chapter title]
\startepigraph
\input ward
\stopepigraph
\stopchapter
It is indeed overkill to use a buffer as in your example. However, there may be
a very good reason to more closely tie the epigraph to the typesetting of the
chapter title. I could then see something like:
\startchapter [title={Chapter title},epigraph={\input ward}]
although I'm sure that the above (untested) syntax would cause problems
with \input... (and probably a \par would be needed somewhere).
Alan
___________________________________________________________________________________
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
___________________________________________________________________________________
