From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_SBL_A autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 18409 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2023 07:21:53 -0000 Received: from zapf.ntg.nl (5.39.185.232) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 23 Apr 2023 07:21:53 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9A6F1C122D; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 09:21:31 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at zapf.ntg.nl Received: from zapf.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zapf.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r2YFhb7rWyR9; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 09:21:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zapf.ntg.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73626E30; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 09:21:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02519E30 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 09:21:29 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at zapf.ntg.nl Received: from zapf.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zapf.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G9nsnaSnNBro for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 09:21:28 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.210.169; helo=mail-pf1-f169.google.com; envelope-from=roma83537@gmail.com; receiver= Received: from mail-pf1-f169.google.com (mail-pf1-f169.google.com [209.85.210.169]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC67D6CE for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 09:21:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f169.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-63b73203e0aso21679947b3a.1 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 00:21:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682234485; x=1684826485; h=subject:from:to:content-language:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GMeLCEIsAEmmL0MrXU2oTyl703FyQvUaLVNUVOLG6eA=; b=IoioNqaJAig1jPsp5EKZPsKbvHvZAupdCG5CM/F+byK2BG0CGECKjiECRSB03AsG9F uOlY7MVBJ0k/mTVBc/m0ivYI6LI80r3oVIacqSMQJ8dFfY/A7n4xA58SMfsAu+4XPN+h PzpC2t2yykLMBI81kucc2XuEZtCdSI4oEAWFUh8jW5iHIkEkUc6bsip910CvlqI8CK8r wzamu/nCZFgJlvdGAHrWoX527dK0ax9tzTbUYlryrf4mWih4321gChQgZ1pbXqpTQ684 qWeMx84hOvFxoQ6TIbnHjWH7iuDyWJvf4EegaRhTQQ8QW77lNfcZ66A01RxxH9CDwYg6 XYwQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682234485; x=1684826485; h=subject:from:to:content-language:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=GMeLCEIsAEmmL0MrXU2oTyl703FyQvUaLVNUVOLG6eA=; b=iXq/+0oFyNMiJkvZDZGct4Q6ow0i2pa8sGsLxKxnW/oRw64xVMpl/WX/T8suqJXcj4 luDgu4FjY8FgnVfSYmYbsZr0wlYsfh3kuyomvTeBAMKZcnhXjt44kg2hU8c4Nc00OXDX rJY83nZdLdUtEqHmm2FagGdb9kd6L/yOKG4u4uuTwVh9iOP/FVjyXLG72q6C0REjj4NK Sr5jdpSz4eXsklITtT6DUxBaZPvKduSEajdo58KXLXBTntbjDOs3Y8D26lhUcrrg4n9m kEG9BElH5pC6yOna9E5SwNhvhiybp1blC/zYUPo15XyadWzOID2eXacebmfYH4AQ1fP9 DJMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9fsPQhoZv1/T3hj5zguX+U4VQruRHeLswu0MVFLYu0kkbL5LXt2 VRh7x9NBs2GyhYSndUcjNDW9lTwXWJ4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350a5DqDa2BYMKhu+2iwcRdBtyuOiL/iUEE8uBhAEptI43XyBicGdCmxq78ZM85Dp7MT3gZgacw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:8e2a:b0:ef:4fa7:b1ee with SMTP id y42-20020a056a208e2a00b000ef4fa7b1eemr10952780pzj.4.1682234485100; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 00:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2405:6e00:208b:c90:6117:2f12:d85b:d802? ([2405:6e00:208b:c90:6117:2f12:d85b:d802]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n22-20020a62e516000000b0063f2a29d65bsm2054473pff.110.2023.04.23.00.21.22 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Apr 2023 00:21:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <43b3e040-69ca-c7b8-e57b-2a5ba389bd58@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 17:21:19 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0 Content-Language: en-AU To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Subject: [NTG-context] adjustment to my local footnotes problem X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.38 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: jbf via ntg-context Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Cc: jbf Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2364358549346977251==" Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Sender: "ntg-context" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============2364358549346977251== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------R41bCS2FsMgntLFH3liJVsEr" Content-Language: en-AU This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------R41bCS2FsMgntLFH3liJVsEr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I realise that I should have been talking about the space between local footnotes, rather than interlinespace (previous email on this issue), but my basic problem still stands. My efforts to influence the space between footnotes placed locally is to no avail so far. I assume it is \setupnote (rather than \setupnotation, my earlier mistake) where I would need to somehow influence distance between footnotes which is currently too large. I have tried \setupnote[before={\blank[small]}, after={\blank[small]}]. It appears to be reducing the space before the entire block of local footnotes but not between the footnotes themselves, which is what I am trying to do. Am I correct in assuming that the \setupnote should influence my \placelocalfootnotes? Or is there something else I should do in the case of local footnotes as distinct from general footnotes (my document contains ONLY local footnotes, however). It seems a simple enough issue, but I just can't get it right. Julian --------------R41bCS2FsMgntLFH3liJVsEr Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I realise that I should have been talking about the space between local footnotes, rather than interlinespace (previous email on this issue), but my basic problem still stands. My efforts to influence the space between footnotes placed locally is to no avail so far.

I assume it is \setupnote (rather than \setupnotation, my earlier mistake) where I would need to somehow influence distance between footnotes which is currently too large. I have tried \setupnote[before={\blank[small]}, after={\blank[small]}]. It appears to be reducing the space before the entire block of local footnotes but not between the footnotes themselves, which is what I am trying to do.

Am I correct in assuming that the \setupnote should influence my \placelocalfootnotes? Or is there something else I should do in the case of local footnotes as distinct from general footnotes (my document contains ONLY local footnotes, however).

It seems a simple enough issue, but I just can't get it right.

Julian

--------------R41bCS2FsMgntLFH3liJVsEr-- --===============2364358549346977251== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : https://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________ --===============2364358549346977251==--