From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/4306 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Giuseppe Bilotta Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re[2]: call for help with context Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 18:48:28 +0100 Sender: owner-ntg-context@let.uu.nl Message-ID: <1303524903.20010308184828@freemail.it> References: <3.0.6.32.20010308154432.0169d4b0@server-1> Reply-To: Giuseppe Bilotta NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035394983 24608 80.91.224.250 (23 Oct 2002 17:43:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:43:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ntg-context@ntg.nl Original-To: Hans Hagen Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:4306 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:4306 >>3) somehow context breaks page in a very odd way: sometime too much >> space between body text and footnote, sometime too little. Maybe it >> has to do with choosing the page dimension that the textheight is >> not a multiple of the baselineskip. HH> Indeed. The new otr will give you more control over that. It is a tricky HH> rounding error problem and (imho) tex does not always give you the control HH> you need. Hans, I posted a mail on the list about footnote handling, about a week ago, named "Still on footnotes", with two test files that show the problems presented in the post. Were you able to pin down the problems? Are they the same as the ones referred in this post? Giuseppe