On Sunday 07 June 2009 16:55:59 Hans Hagen wrote:
> Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> > Alan BRASLAU wrote:
> >> On Sunday 07 June 2009 14:10:10 Hans Hagen wrote:
> >>> Alan BRASLAU wrote:
> On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
> > Peter Münster wrote:
> >> Should this work, or shou
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
> > Should there be a difference (perhaps "THIN SPACE" breakable)?
>
> Yes, U+2009 is supposed to be breakable.
Ok, but not the case in ConTeXt:
\starttext
\hsize1pt
bla bla
\stoptext
Cheers, Peter
--
Contact information: http://pmrb.free.fr/con
> Should there be a difference (perhaps "THIN SPACE" breakable)?
Yes, U+2009 is supposed to be breakable.
Arthur
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
mail
On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, Hans Hagen wrote:
> Peter Münster wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This used to work with MKIV, but with today's version, it does not:
> >
> > \starttext
> > X X THIN SPACE (U+2009)\blank
> > X X NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE (U+202F)\blank
> > X X NO-BREAK SPACE (U+00A0)\blank
> > \stoptex
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Alan BRASLAU wrote:
On Sunday 07 June 2009 14:10:10 Hans Hagen wrote:
Alan BRASLAU wrote:
On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
Peter Münster wrote:
Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the
past?
repaired in next beta (was unwanted s
Alan BRASLAU wrote:
On Sunday 07 June 2009 14:10:10 Hans Hagen wrote:
Alan BRASLAU wrote:
On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
Peter Münster wrote:
Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
repaired in next beta (was unwanted side effect of optimizat
On Sunday 07 June 2009 14:10:10 Hans Hagen wrote:
> Alan BRASLAU wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
> >> Peter Münster wrote:
> >>> Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
> >>
> >> repaired in next beta (was unwanted side effect of optimizat
Alan BRASLAU wrote:
On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
Peter Münster wrote:
Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
repaired in next beta (was unwanted side effect of optimization)
"~", by the way, appears not to be respected in math mode; exampl
On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
> Peter Münster wrote:
> > Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
>
> repaired in next beta (was unwanted side effect of optimization)
"~", by the way, appears not to be respected in math mode; example:
\starttext
$
Peter Münster wrote:
Hello,
This used to work with MKIV, but with today's version, it does not:
\starttext
X X THIN SPACE (U+2009)\blank
X X NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE (U+202F)\blank
X X NO-BREAK SPACE (U+00A0)\blank
\stoptext
Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
Hello,
This used to work with MKIV, but with today's version, it does not:
\starttext
X X THIN SPACE (U+2009)\blank
X X NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE (U+202F)\blank
X X NO-BREAK SPACE (U+00A0)\blank
\stoptext
Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
Cheers, Peter
--
Cont
11 matches
Mail list logo