subject kills bookmarks?

subject kills bookmarks?

[Steffen Wolfrum]

Hi,

Why does subject kill bookmarks when used as first entry?
See attached example. 

(I am not sure whether I misunderstood the structural logic that's used for bookmarks.)

Steffen



\setupinteraction[state=start]
\setupinteractionscreen[option=bookmark]

\setupbodyfont[mscore,12pt]



\defineconversion [greekone] [α,β,γ,δ,ε,ζ,η,θ,ι,κ,λ,μ,ν,ξ,ο,π,ρ,σ,τ,υ,φ,χ,ψ,ω]

\setuphead
 [chapter]
[sectionsegments=2:2,conversion=numbers,sectionstarter={},sectionstopper={.}]
\setuphead
 [section]
[sectionsegments=3:3,conversion=characters,sectionstarter={},sectionstopper={)}]
\setuphead
 [subsection]
[sectionsegments=4:4,conversion=greekone,sectionstarter={(},sectionstopper={)}]


\placebookmarks[chapter,section,subsection,subsubsection,subject][all][force=yes]

\starttext
\placelist[chapter,section,subsection,subsubsection,subject][criterium=all]

		\subject{Vorwort}% Here bookmarks are killed?
		\chapter{Eins}
	%	\subject{Vorwort}% Here it would work!
       \section{Klein A}
       \section{Klein B}
       \subsection{Alpha}
       \subsection{Beta}
       \chapter{Zwei}

\stoptext


___________________________________________________________________________________
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  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: subject kills bookmarks?

[Hans Hagen]

On 15-8-2010 7:05, Steffen Wolfrum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Why does subject kill bookmarks when used as first entry?
> See attached example.
>
> (I am not sure whether I misunderstood the structural logic that's used for bookmarks.)

Well, they assume some structure indeed and start from a parent that has 
a higher order.

Normally one will have more structure (introductions or whatever) and 
never start with a dangling subject.

In a toc this goes unnoticed as there is no tree visualized there.

I fixed it using a horrible hack that took me a whole afternoon of 
experimenting to cook up so this is the last thing I will do about 
bookmarks for a long time (esp such weird cases).

Having a dangling one in for instance an appendix will show the problem 
as one will never know where it actually belongs to then. A better way 
would be to have a dedicated 'inject level zero bookmark here' command 
but it has a very low priority.

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
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  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: subject kills bookmarks?

[Steffen Wolfrum]

Am 16.08.2010 um 20:06 schrieb Hans Hagen:

> On 15-8-2010 7:05, Steffen Wolfrum wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Why does subject kill bookmarks when used as first entry?
>> See attached example.
>> 
>> (I am not sure whether I misunderstood the structural logic that's used for bookmarks.)
> 
> Well, they assume some structure indeed and start from a parent that has a higher order.
> 
> Normally one will have more structure (introductions or whatever) and never start with a dangling subject.
> 
> In a toc this goes unnoticed as there is no tree visualized there.



That touches an interesting question: "Who sets structure?"

Easily I can think you hundreds of books where the author set "Preface", "Forword", "List of Abbreviations" and "List of Content" in a subordinate style. When the main text starts, this style is the same that is used for the second (or third) sectioning level. The same shows up in TOC: if these entries are listed in TOC, they are visually structured (by indentation and font) explicitly as the second (sometimes third) sectioning level.

As far as I have understood Hans' answer, the logic for bookmarks (or structured, tagged PDF in general?) works differently: even though the "design" of these sections (ie. section *headings*!) by the author is intended to be subordinated, nevertheless these section should be structured in a parent/child way: the first section mentioned is meant to be the highest level:

Would this map and represent the structure that the author was thinking of?


(Thank God it is not me who invented the structure of books and thus has to bear the blame ... and thank goodness we have Hans who manages to transform even the weirdest inputs and specs!)

Steffen
___________________________________________________________________________________
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  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Re: subject kills bookmarks?

[Hans Hagen]

> Easily I can think you hundreds of books where the author set "Preface", "Forword", "List of Abbreviations" and "List of Content" in a subordinate style. When the main text starts, this style is the same that is used for the second (or third) sectioning level. The same shows up in TOC: if these entries are listed in TOC, they are visually structured (by indentation and font) explicitly as the second (sometimes third) sectioning level.
>
> As far as I have understood Hans' answer, the logic for bookmarks (or structured, tagged PDF in general?) works differently: even though the "design" of these sections (ie. section *headings*!) by the author is intended to be subordinated, nevertheless these section should be structured in a parent/child way: the first section mentioned is meant to be the highest level:

> Would this map and represent the structure that the author was thinking of?

In a typeset toc it's often quite clear as visual clues are used 
(indentation, font, vertical spacing, either of not a pagenumber)

I have made some quite complex structured docs (tens of different heads 
at the same level). This goes ok as long as one is in control, but in 
automated flows with input that can have some components not being 
present and then also typeset one can have interesting confusing 
situations. In such cases fonts/spacing in a toc depend on an analysis 
of the structure (runtime).

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
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  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________