Re: unicode no-break spaces

[Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com>]

Alan BRASLAU wrote:
> On Sunday 07 June 2009 14:10:10 Hans Hagen wrote:
>> Alan BRASLAU wrote:
>>> On Sunday 07 June 2009 13:12:11 Hans Hagen wrote:
>>>> Peter Münster wrote:
>>>>> Should this work, or should we rather use "~" and "\," as in the past?
>>>> repaired in next beta (was unwanted side effect of optimization)
>>> "~", by the way, appears not to be respected in math mode; example:
>>>
>>> \starttext
>>> $3\times 10^{-9}~\text{m}$
>>>
>>> $3\times 10^{-9}\,\text{m}$
>>> \stoptext
>> no surprise, as math has its own spacing model so it all depends on the
>> definitions; i'm not even sure if we shoule support an active ~ in math
>> mode at all
> 
> I do not have any strong feelings about this, but do believe that "~" has 
> always provided an unbreakable white space in TeX, both in text and math mode. 
> I also feel that "~" is more readable than "\,".

The activeness of ~ isn't that important, but there really should be
a non-breakable space in math mode, and an active ~ is the most logical
choice because of 20 years of TeX input. You can pick something else,
but it is definately needed, and it should be shorter than
   "\penalty10000 \ "

Best wishes,
Taco
___________________________________________________________________________________
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://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________