Re: Re: itemize

[Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>]

Gary Pajer wrote:

> Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
>
>> Me stupid! Willi, this message made my day. I've been using ConTeXt 
>> for more than a year now, but I was never able to figure out what 
>> setupitemize [.1.] .1. number each meant. So it's the level of 
>> itemization. Thanks, that should make things easier. And many thanks 
>> to Patrick and to you for pointing out the left= option. ConTeXt and 
>> the number of options it gives never cease to amaze me!
>
>
> since we're back on the topic of itemize, I'll repost a question that 
> I've posted here before:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> It seems to me that the 'before' and 'after' keywords used in the third
> argument of \setupitemize are operative only if 'columns' are also
> specified.  In the example below, the hairlines disappear if the 
> 'columns'
> keyword is eliminated.
>
>
> Feature, bug, or misunderstanding?

a bit of all, this will take me some time (maybe when i redo the item 
environment); has to do with grouping and such as well as before/after 
handling

(compare output with\chardef\autoitemgroupspacing=0 set)

>
> BTW:   can the lengths of the two hairlines in this example be made to be
> the same length?  What's causing the indentation of the first hairline?

a bit tricky: par's (\endgraf's interfere in such matters, i.e. you need 
to invoke the command when the width is (still) known)

\setupitemize
  [2]
  [a,packed,columns]
  [before={\thinrule\endgraf},
   after={\endgraf\thinrule}]