Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On 14 Jul 2014, at 19:29, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote: quite some sub-systems are described in their own manuals (fonts, tables, xml, ...) and these manuals are quite up to date (and easier to maintain than one big fat manual also, additional documentation is something that users need to participate in (just pick a topic) even if it has high priority, that doesn't mean that those involved have much free time left to do that next to their regular work (as usual most development is done in spare time) so, patience is needed, I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a decennium), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. BTW, you can’t be serious asking the users to provide the documentation, can you? G ___ 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 ___
[NTG-context] Bibliography: criterium=all
Hi everyone, I really have difficulties with the bibliograpy system. Sorry about that. I would like to print the whole bibliography so I followed mkiv-publications.pdf and ended up with the file: \usebtxdataset[example][./mkiv-publications.bib] \definebtxrendering [example] [dataset=example, method=local, alternative=apa] \starttext \showbtxdatasetfields[example] \placebtxrendering [example] [criterium=all] \stoptext I get the list but not the bibliography itself. What is wrong with my file? Is there also a way to sort the entries by date? Best, F. ___ 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] Styling References
Sweet. Thank you.
Malte.
--
“The Electric Monk was a labour-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video
recorder... Electric Monks believed things for you, thus saving you what was
becoming an increasingly onerous task, that of believing all the things the
world expected you to believe.”
― Douglas Adams, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
On 14 Jul 2014, at 23:03 , Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfg...@gmail.com
wrote:
Am 14.07.2014 um 13:58 schrieb Malte Stien ma...@stien.de:
Hi,
I need to style my references to SOME section/subsection/subsubsection
differently. Here is an example:
\starttext
There are lots of animals such as \about[ducks] and \about[bears].
More about this can be found in Chapter~\about[introduction].
\chapter[introduction]{Introduction}
\section[ducks]{Ducks}
Some information about ducks...
\section[bears]{Bears}
Some information about baers...
\stoptext
I am happy for the reference to the Introduction chapter to be in regular
type with quotes, but I would like to render the references to Ducks and
Baers in italics without the quotes. Note, that I do not require for ConTeXt
to pick one or the other style automatically based on the section (that
would be pretty complicated, I suppose). I am happy to ‘hint’ it when I make
the reference. So, for example, I am happy to replace the first like with
There are lots of animals such as \animalabout[ducks] and
\animalabout[bears].
...but so far I have been unsuccessful in creating such a \animalabout
command. I looked at \definereferenceformat which gets rid of the quotes,
but I can’t make it go italics. I also looked at \setupreferencing, but that
seems to affect ALL \abouts.
\definereferenceformat[animalabout][style=italic,color=blue,type=title,left=«,right=»]
\starttext
There are lots of animals such as \about[ducks] and \about[bears].
There are lots of animals such as \animalabout[ducks] and \animalabout[bears].
\chapter[introduction]{Introduction}
\section[ducks]{Ducks}
Some information about ducks...
\section[bears]{Bears}
Some information about baers...
\stoptext
Wolfgang
___
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
___
___
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
___
[NTG-context] Height fitting with row spanning in a table
I have finally found a not perfect solution: setting manually the height of the bar cell shrinks the foo cell (setting height=fit for the foo cell does not work). \starttext \startTABLE \NC foo \NC[nr=2] \input knuth \NC \NR \NC[height=28ex] bar\NC \NR \stopTABLE \stoptext I have chosen 28ex for the height since linespace in ConTeXt equals to 2.8ex and I need the height of 10 lines in this example to fit the knuth paragraph (if I could find a way to get automatically the number of lines required to fit the knuth paragraph it would be better). ___ 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Gerben Wierda wrote: I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a decennium), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. Basically all the development in ConTeXt is voluntarily. Pro bono. Besides tinkering, Hans still needs to earn some money from somewhere. I find it amazing how much time he already spends doing good things for the community. But he's not omnipotent. If there is interest from some commercial company to fund the project enough to allow some people to work full-time on documentation (including paying Hans to allow him to spend more time on the project), I'm sure that it could be done. BTW, you can’t be serious asking the users to provide the documentation, can you? There are many excellent books out there written by writers, not the authors of software. (I didn't even get a manual for Windows or OS X where the companies make big money. Certain things or tricks can only be done when hackers find a way to do X without anyone documenting feature X. And the last phone I bought also came without any documentation whatsoever.) There are more than enough *users* of ConTeXt capable of coming up with proper documentation (depending on the definition of user of course, but one could count Taco and Wolfgang as users and they are certainly not the only ones knowing ConTeXt from inside out). But there's of course always a question of motivation (combined with time and money of course). ConTeXt comes with full source code, so users can easily study the source code. The project could easily employ two people to work full time just to keep up with the pace of development (once they would catch up). Ohloh estimates that it took more than 300 person-years to write the source code for example ;) Sure, the estimate is problematic because ConTeXt includes the complete Unicode as well as all hyphenation patterns which simply count as lines. But it's still an enormous project. Oven once you remove the hyphenation patterns and char-def.lua, there are still 36 MB remaining. The pgf project has a 1200 page manual for less that 5 MB of source code. LaTeX has a gazillion of manuals and if you don't know what package you should be looking for, it's not really helping. I agree that it would be awesome if there was complete documentation available + maybe three manuals/tutorials from beginner to master, but you cannot expect it from Hans to do all the work on his own. Mojca ___ 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Gerben Wierda gerben.wie...@rna.nl wrote: On 14 Jul 2014, at 19:29, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote: quite some sub-systems are described in their own manuals (fonts, tables, xml, ...) and these manuals are quite up to date (and easier to maintain than one big fat manual also, additional documentation is something that users need to participate in (just pick a topic) even if it has high priority, that doesn't mean that those involved have much free time left to do that next to their regular work (as usual most development is done in spare time) so, patience is needed, I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a *decennium*), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. BTW, you can’t be serious asking the *users* to provide the documentation, can you? These are still good Fonts in ConTeXt Layouts in ConTeXt MetaFun manual MKII - MKIV, the history of LuaTeX http://www.h2o-books.com/catalog/5 -- luigi ___ 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
As I wrote in another thread, the state of the docs worries me too. I take it that the suggestion to study the source was not serious, and perhaps it is indeed a matter of priorities. As a new user I have a strong opinion that the documentation should be a higher priority than it seems to be. All the arguments about how many person-hours it would take and the huge task it is, in my eyes, only furthers the point that it is not considered as important as doing real development. I consider the docs a core part of the project, and the code another part, hence the disagreement in regards to the priorities. Pro-bono or not is not an issue, since time is spent on the project in some form. Writing features that few people know about and are able to use is only half of the dev work. But I get it that documenting is a pain, and seemingly frivolous work. The separate manuals may have been good, but they look fragmented and there is no unified docs to go to when in doubt. And having one place to go is even easier to maintain than many. The wiki is a nice idea, but it needs much more rigour to function as real docs. Some suggestions. I'm assuming some form of wiki-like website that can be the contextgarden or (preferably) another official docs/wiki/wiki-like site. All the content of the manuals should be unified in this site. If a crowdsourcing/users-can-do-it approach is taken, a clear structure needs to be previously laid out, so that we know what blanks to fill. And even with collaboration/feedback, core people should do it. It is important that reviewing and check marking the new edits be done by some authoritative group, so that the community knows what to trust, what should work as documented so that we can report real issues. It is important to label the information as reviwed and up to date, and to which version it applies, mkii/mkiv If this structure is put on top of the context garden, some labeling is needed to distinguish the extra pages from the structural docs pages. There are many good examples out there of good docs structure and presentation. I'm willing to collaborate what I can with my limited knowledge and time, even if little while writing my master's thesis. Sorry to annoy with this again, YT 2014-07-15 11:55 GMT-03:00 luigi scarso luigi.sca...@gmail.com: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Gerben Wierda gerben.wie...@rna.nl wrote: On 14 Jul 2014, at 19:29, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote: quite some sub-systems are described in their own manuals (fonts, tables, xml, ...) and these manuals are quite up to date (and easier to maintain than one big fat manual also, additional documentation is something that users need to participate in (just pick a topic) even if it has high priority, that doesn't mean that those involved have much free time left to do that next to their regular work (as usual most development is done in spare time) so, patience is needed, I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a *decennium*), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. BTW, you can’t be serious asking the *users* to provide the documentation, can you? These are still good Fonts in ConTeXt Layouts in ConTeXt MetaFun manual MKII - MKIV, the history of LuaTeX http://www.h2o-books.com/catalog/5 -- luigi ___ 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 ___ ___ 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
Re: [NTG-context] Which Image quality should I use ?
On Sun, Jul 13 2014, Pol Stra wrote: I can be done automatically for example by using this module: http://modules.contextgarden.net/grph-downsample Thank you, it looks interesting. Is there a documentation somewhere or could you provide an example about how to use it ? Hi, Here an example: http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Catalogue_raisonné Also, it changes the resolution only at inclusion into the pdf or it does it on original files ? My concern is to give the sources in attachment of the document, so if I don't change those files, the document will still be huge. The downscaled images are kept on disk in the cache sub-directory. There is a way to include the source without duplicates images ? Yes. There is also an old module t-degrade.tex but I don't know, if it still works with recent ConTeXt versions. -- Peter ___ 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] Which Image quality should I use ?
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, Peter Münster wrote: There is also an old module t-degrade.tex but I don't know, if it still works with recent ConTeXt versions. It is possible to create a wrapper around t-filter to provide the functionality of t-degrade and/or grph-downsample, so that one could use: \downsample[filename][options] The main advantage is that one can use all the options of t-filter module: specify the cache directory, force reruns, etc. Let me know if there is any interest in such a wrapper. 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] Which Image quality should I use ?
On 7/15/2014 7:03 PM, Peter Münster wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13 2014, Pol Stra wrote:
I can be done automatically for example by using this module:
http://modules.contextgarden.net/grph-downsample
Thank you, it looks interesting. Is there a documentation somewhere or could
you provide an example about how to use it ?
Hi,
Here an example: http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Catalogue_raisonné
Also, it changes the resolution only at inclusion into the pdf or it does it
on original files ? My concern is to give the sources in attachment of the
document, so if I don't change those files, the document will still be huge.
The downscaled images are kept on disk in the cache sub-directory.
There is a way to include the source without duplicates images ?
Yes.
There is also an old module t-degrade.tex but I don't know, if it still
works with recent ConTeXt versions.
so you have several options:
- using build in
- using specific modules
built in boils down to something
\startluacode
figures.converters[png] = {
[lowres.png] = function(oldname,newname,resolution)
os.execute(string.format('gm convert -depth 1 %s
%s',oldname,newname))
end,
}
-- figures.suffixes[lowres.png] = figures.suffixes.png -- suffix is
automatically done
\stopluacode
\starttext
\externalfigure[mill.png][conversion=lowres.png]
\stoptext
in nearly all our projects we get images that need to be converted
(color - bw, downsampling, removing crap from pdf, etc) but in most
cases we also convert to pdf then because that is normally the fastest
way to include an image (which is why one can also define a prefix and
cache)
what method you choose depends on how much control you want (it's hard
to predict demands) ... btw, many of these build-in mechanism are
derived from mkii methods, where we also had resource manipulators and
so (we still have figure databases btw)
Hans
-
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On 7/15/2014 5:33 PM, Yuri Teixeira wrote: As I wrote in another thread, the state of the docs worries me too. I take it that the suggestion to study the source was not serious, and perhaps it is indeed a matter of priorities. As a new user I have a strong opinion that the documentation should be a higher priority than it seems to be. All the arguments about how many person-hours it would take and the huge task it is, in my eyes, only furthers the point that it is not considered as important as doing real development. I Well, without development (like luatex and mp and fonts and so) it would be a dead end anyway. Also, without some of the new things I could not use context myself in projects (and thereby put time in it). consider the docs a core part of the project, and the code another part, hence the disagreement in regards to the priorities. Pro-bono or not is not an issue, since time is spent on the project in some form. Writing features that few people know about and are able to use is only half of the dev work. Most mechanism that are new or renewed also come with pretty recent manuals (like xtables and new bibliography support); older code is mostly compatible with what old manuals describe (ok we could just bump the date to 2014 but why). For me that's the most I can so ... write in sync with development. (I simply run out of time otherwise.) But I get it that documenting is a pain, and seemingly frivolous work. The separate manuals may have been good, but they look fragmented and there is no unified docs to go to when in doubt. And having one place to go is even easier to maintain than many. The wiki is a nice idea, but it needs much more rigour to function as real docs. hm, I spend quite some time on writing code but also on documentations; did you read the xtable, xml, cld, fonts, metafun, etc manuals as well as mk, hybrid, allkind? It's up to others to translate that into something better. There are articles published (ok, in that case it helps to be a member if a user group, which helps keeping tex alive anyway). There are also examples in the test suite that can probably be turned into docu. Some suggestions. I'm assuming some form of wiki-like website that can be the contextgarden or (preferably) another official docs/wiki/wiki-like site. everyone can write documentation (and it also happens) ... we have the wiki etc to publish them .. and everyone can conrtibute to make the wiki better (and provide pointers to documentation) All the content of the manuals should be unified in this site. If a crowdsourcing/users-can-do-it approach is taken, a clear structure needs to be previously laid out, so that we know what blanks to fill. And even with collaboration/feedback, core people should do it. It is important that reviewing and check marking the new edits be done by some authoritative group, so that the community knows what to trust, what should work as documented so that we can report real issues. It is important to label the information as reviwed and up to date, and to which version it applies, mkii/mkiv If this structure is put on top of the context garden, some labeling is needed to distinguish the extra pages from the structural docs pages. the problem there is that it needs some users who dedicate time and so that for many years in order to keep consistency (btw, there are some real good sections on the wiki already) There are many good examples out there of good docs structure and presentation. I'm willing to collaborate what I can with my limited knowledge and time, even if little while writing my master's thesis. In that case, coordinate with Sietse. One of the things we want to (be) do(ne) is a split between mkii and mkiv on the wiki. Sorry to annoy with this again, No problem, as you also offer to help, YT 2014-07-15 11:55 GMT-03:00 luigi scarso luigi.sca...@gmail.com mailto:luigi.sca...@gmail.com: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Gerben Wierda gerben.wie...@rna.nl mailto:gerben.wie...@rna.nl wrote: On 14 Jul 2014, at 19:29, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl mailto:pra...@wxs.nl wrote: quite some sub-systems are described in their own manuals (fonts, tables, xml, ...) and these manuals are quite up to date (and easier to maintain than one big fat manual also, additional documentation is something that users need to participate in (just pick a topic) even if it has high priority, that doesn't mean that those involved have much free time left to do that next to their regular work (as usual most development is done in spare time) so, patience is needed, I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On 7/15/2014 11:59 AM, Gerben Wierda wrote: On 14 Jul 2014, at 19:29, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl mailto:pra...@wxs.nl wrote: quite some sub-systems are described in their own manuals (fonts, tables, xml, ...) and these manuals are quite up to date (and easier to maintain than one big fat manual also, additional documentation is something that users need to participate in (just pick a topic) even if it has high priority, that doesn't mean that those involved have much free time left to do that next to their regular work (as usual most development is done in spare time) so, patience is needed, I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a /decennium/), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. BTW, you can’t be serious asking the /users/ to provide the documentation, can you? Well, you need to keep this in mind: - we are using it ourselves (already for a long time) so we depend on it and so we keep it going - we spend most of our company time on development and support .. and we live with that - our roadmap does *not* include getting big (with open source as stepping stone), *not* messing with users by selling ourselves after a while, and *not* splitting between 'context for users' and 'context professional or enterprise', so everyone gets what we have (which also means that documentation will always be behind!) - we have no big projects that pay for development (from which we can then work on documentation) .. in fact, our projects are rather niche and special - we're quite satisfied with the users (they are demanding and creative) ... context never aimed at one-time-users Now, we don't ask users to provide documentation, but on the other hand, if you look at latex, lost of documentation starts at users. Maybe some day I find more time ... Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Bibliography: criterium=all
On 7/15/2014 12:39 PM, Flavien Lambert wrote: Hi everyone, I really have difficulties with the bibliograpy system. Sorry about that. I would like to print the whole bibliography so I followed mkiv-publications.pdf and ended up with the file: \usebtxdataset[example][./mkiv-publications.bib] \definebtxrendering [example] [dataset=example, method=local, alternative=apa] \starttext \showbtxdatasetfields[example] \placebtxrendering [example] [criterium=all] \stoptext I get the list but not the bibliography itself. What is wrong with my file? Is there also a way to sort the entries by date? The criterium is used for cited entries, and text/all then means for the whole document. In your case you wan the data set (no refs in the text): \placebtxrendering [example] [method=dataset] This axis is one of the new things as using criterium for that is messy. Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Height fitting with row spanning in a table
On 7/15/2014 1:59 PM, Maggyero wrote: I have finally found a not perfect solution: setting manually the height of the bar cell shrinks the foo cell (setting height=fit for the foo cell does not work). \starttext \startTABLE \NC foo \NC[nr=2] \input knuth \NC \NR \NC[height=28ex] bar\NC \NR \stopTABLE \stoptext I have chosen 28ex for the height since linespace in ConTeXt equals to 2.8ex and I need the height of 10 lines in this example to fit the knuth paragraph (if I could find a way to get automatically the number of lines required to fit the knuth paragraph it would be better). i'll have a look at it later (maybe in xtables) - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On Jul 15, 2014, at 2:59 AM, Gerben Wierda gerben.wie...@rna.nl wrote: I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a decennium), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. Agreed, though for my part with the opposite emphasis. I do not think ConTeXt is meant to be a “serious product”, as in being developed to be a product in the “marketplace” of typesetting software — even open/free software. My impression is exactly yours, it is being developed primarily for the purposes of Pragma—a small in-crowd no doubt—but with extraordinarily generous support for a small community of non-Pragma people interested in using it. I’m grateful to have access to ConTeXt, as for me it’s the only sane method of typesetting the kind of documents I wish to typeset — not LaTeX, not InDesign, not Plain TeX, … I can tell you that every question or suggestion I’ve had has been responded to in the most generous form in this community, which I cannot say about any other platform I’ve used, typesetting or otherwise. It’s suspect to take umbrage on another’s behalf, but “tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker” — It’s absurd to suggest that Hans co. are “tinkering” for the sake of tinkering. David ___ 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 ___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
On 7/16/2014 12:26 AM, David Wooten wrote: On Jul 15, 2014, at 2:59 AM, Gerben Wierda gerben.wie...@rna.nl mailto:gerben.wie...@rna.nl wrote: I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a /decennium/), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. Agreed, though for my part with the opposite emphasis. I do not think ConTeXt is meant to be a “serious product”, as in /being developed to be a product in the “marketplace” of typesetting software — even open/free software. /My impression is exactly yours, it is being developed primarily for the purposes of Pragma—a small in-crowd no doubt—but with don't get me wrong: the development is to a large extend possible because we can use it at pragma (it make sit possible to do things that often cannot be done otherwise) but most of the features that have been added the last years as well as numerous additional options are purely user driven: most styles we write are rather simple .. the complexity comes from the often messy or complex or to-be-manipulated content and range of products; so, it being mostly user driven (but within the constraints that we keep a relative stable core) also means that users have a responsibility for helping with documentation extraordinarily generous support for a small community of non-Pragma people interested in using it. I’m /grateful/ to have access to ConTeXt, as for me it’s the only sane method of typesetting the kind of documents I wish to typeset — /not /LaTeX, /not /InDesign, /not /Plain TeX, … I can tell you that every question or suggestion I’ve had has been responded to in the most generous form in this community, which I cannot say about /any other/ platform I’ve used, typesetting or otherwise. keep in mind that context has been part of the tex distributions for quite a while now (nearly 20 years), that there are others than me who know the source code pretty well (which means that it doesn't depend on pragma), that the context crowd has been actively involved in development of (and even triggered) general tex developments (..., luatex, mplib, fonts, ...) so it's not as isolated as you suggest. once the move from mkii to mkiv is finishes and luatex is kind of done, there might be time for writing more documentation; we're far from retiring of the other macro packages, plain tex is frozen, and latex dev is quite controlled too (anyone can write additional code for any macro package) (and the context mailing list is one of the more active tex related lists and not the smallest either) It’s suspect to take umbrage on another’s behalf, but “tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker” — It’s absurd to suggest that Hans co. are “tinkering” for the sake of tinkering. sometimes we do, when we explore new posibilities, Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] State of documentation of ConTeXt?
As is said most often here in California, that’s just your opinion Hans! ;) On Jul 15, 2014, at 3:54 PM, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote: On 7/16/2014 12:26 AM, David Wooten wrote: On Jul 15, 2014, at 2:59 AM, Gerben Wierda gerben.wie...@rna.nl mailto:gerben.wie...@rna.nl wrote: I like ConTeXt (still do, I liked its approach when I first encountered it). But the project is more the ongoing private tinkering of a small in-crowd (that communicates with some followers). ConTeXt is managed a bit like a small group of researchers sharing a couple of complex and undocumented models/programs and tinkering with them as they go along. It’s an activity without formal design, but with a lot of trial-and-error/testing. Given that status (and the fact that it has had that status for over a /decennium/), I don’t expect it to ever become a serious product that is (semi-)professionally managed. I prefer content over management every day, but something like this needs some minimal management. That requires both time (=money) and capabilities. Besides, the tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker. Agreed, though for my part with the opposite emphasis. I do not think ConTeXt is meant to be a “serious product”, as in /being developed to be a product in the “marketplace” of typesetting software — even open/free software. /My impression is exactly yours, it is being developed primarily for the purposes of Pragma—a small in-crowd no doubt—but with don't get me wrong: the development is to a large extend possible because we can use it at pragma (it make sit possible to do things that often cannot be done otherwise) but most of the features that have been added the last years as well as numerous additional options are purely user driven: most styles we write are rather simple .. the complexity comes from the often messy or complex or to-be-manipulated content and range of products; so, it being mostly user driven (but within the constraints that we keep a relative stable core) also means that users have a responsibility for helping with documentation extraordinarily generous support for a small community of non-Pragma people interested in using it. I’m /grateful/ to have access to ConTeXt, as for me it’s the only sane method of typesetting the kind of documents I wish to typeset — /not /LaTeX, /not /InDesign, /not /Plain TeX, … I can tell you that every question or suggestion I’ve had has been responded to in the most generous form in this community, which I cannot say about /any other/ platform I’ve used, typesetting or otherwise. keep in mind that context has been part of the tex distributions for quite a while now (nearly 20 years), that there are others than me who know the source code pretty well (which means that it doesn't depend on pragma), that the context crowd has been actively involved in development of (and even triggered) general tex developments (..., luatex, mplib, fonts, ...) so it's not as isolated as you suggest. once the move from mkii to mkiv is finishes and luatex is kind of done, there might be time for writing more documentation; we're far from retiring of the other macro packages, plain tex is frozen, and latex dev is quite controlled too (anyone can write additional code for any macro package) (and the context mailing list is one of the more active tex related lists and not the smallest either) It’s suspect to take umbrage on another’s behalf, but “tinkering researchers may not be inclined to do that, they want to tinker” — It’s absurd to suggest that Hans co. are “tinkering” for the sake of tinkering. sometimes we do, when we explore new posibilities, Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___ ___ 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 :
Re: [NTG-context] Bibliography: criterium=all
Thanks Hans, I am really sorry but I still do not get any entry printed (I followed your explanation as well as p. 25 of mkiv-publications.pdf) \usebtxdataset[example][./mkiv-publications.bib] \definebtxrendering[dataset=example,method=dataset] \starttext \showbtxdatasetfields[example] some text \placebtxrendering[example] \stoptext Could you just give a minimal example? And, if possible, a way to sort by date... Once again, my apologies for taking your time with that. Best, F. On 16 July 2014 04:31, Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote: On 7/15/2014 12:39 PM, Flavien Lambert wrote: Hi everyone, I really have difficulties with the bibliograpy system. Sorry about that. I would like to print the whole bibliography so I followed mkiv-publications.pdf and ended up with the file: \usebtxdataset[example][./mkiv-publications.bib] \definebtxrendering [example] [dataset=example, method=local, alternative=apa] \starttext \showbtxdatasetfields[example] \placebtxrendering [example] [criterium=all] \stoptext I get the list but not the bibliography itself. What is wrong with my file? Is there also a way to sort the entries by date? The criterium is used for cited entries, and text/all then means for the whole document. In your case you wan the data set (no refs in the text): \placebtxrendering [example] [method=dataset] This axis is one of the new things as using criterium for that is messy. Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 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 : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___ ___ 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 ___
