Wolfgang (off-list),

It is simply wrong to say that \italicface as defined gives only \it or 
\bi as a result. Look at the definition. If the current fontalternative 
is it \it it will give a \tf result. It is sensitive to the current 
state in a similar way that \em and \emph are, but it will always give 
an italic or roman result.

-- 
Rik

On 9/26/2021 18:37, Wolfgang Schuster via ntg-context wrote:
> Rik Kabel via ntg-context schrieb am 27.09.2021 um 00:20:
>>
>> So, I am asking whether, in places where folks often use 
>> style=italic, it might be better to consider style=italicface.
>>
>> Bug report: \meaning\italicface gives:
>>
>>     protected macro:\relax \ifx \fontalternative \s!tf \it \orelse
>>     \ifx \fontalternative
>>     \s!bf \bi \else \tf \fi
>>
>> This leaves out the transition from bi to bf. That transition is done 
>> by \emph, but \emph may give slanted while \italicface is always italic.
>>
>
> The \italicface command uses either \it or \bi as result but it never 
> result in upright text and the "italic" in the name tells you this, 
> there are commands (e.g. \boldface) with similar results. To get a 
> slanted style you have to use the \slantedface command.
>
> 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://context.aanhet.net
> archive  :https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
> wiki     :http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________