Re[2]: Halfway between itemizations and descriptions

[Giuseppe Bilotta <gip.bilotta@iol.it>]

Thursday, November 24, 2005 Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> Hans Hagen wrote:
>> Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:
>> 
>>> Yes, that's a good start :) however, I would leave the
>>> option to have both the symbol and the text, exactly as if
>>> it was run-in \head (i.e. with the actual item test
>>> following the \head text on the same line). However, you ma
>>> want to have this as an option to \head ... maybe it can
>>> already be achieved with an appropriate afterhead?
>>>  
>>>
>> 
>> so you want
>> 
>> 1.  somethingbold  whatever text follows in running font
>> 
>> 2.  somethingelsebold  whatever othertext follows in running font

> That would be quite simple, like so:

>    \def\itemplus{\dosingleempty\doitemplus}
>    \def\doitemplus[#1]#2{\item[#1] {\bf #2}}

For example (where \bf is \someconfigurablecommand).

However, I find it really 'funny' that there are n different
methods to create items in an enumeration ... should these
be rather enumeration options, so that you can use the same
source code and just chang the stuff in \setup/\staritemize
to achieve the different effects?

This is why I was thinking of using \head, still, for
example.

-- 
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta