From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/61915 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Elias Oltmanns Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Wikifying: footnotes in margin - two questions Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:31:53 +0200 Message-ID: <871v8kctfq.fsf@denkblock.local> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1285259541 20815 80.91.229.12 (23 Sep 2010 16:32:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:32:21 +0000 (UTC) To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Thu Sep 23 18:32:18 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([195.12.62.10]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OyoiS-0006lG-Cs for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3047CA79D; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:11 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id fGzmTNnYboaw; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:09 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF3FCA78A; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:08 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AA84CA78A for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:07 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id EDIIIACwQvHz for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:05 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from filter1-til.mf.surf.net (filter1-til.mf.surf.net [194.171.167.217]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B261CA6D8 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:05 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from nebensachen.de (nebensachen.de [78.46.130.30]) by filter1-til.mf.surf.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id o8NGW3b3015245 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:04 +0200 Original-Received: from upstream.obscured ([192.168.0.1]) by mail.nebensachen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D14020DA389 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:32:03 +0200 (CEST) X-Hashcash: 1:20:100923:ntg-context@ntg.nl::icpYI4/+VYmMfWp1:00000000000000000000000000000000000000000002cvY Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0, tokens from: @@RPTN) X-CanIt-Geo: ip=78.46.130.30; country=DE; region=01; city=Karlsruhe; latitude=49.0047; longitude=8.3858; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=49.0047,8.3858&z=6 X-CanItPRO-Stream: uu:ntg-context@ntg.nl (inherits from uu:default, base:default) X-Canit-Stats-ID: 08Dagw3IJ - 4f16bd527b1c - 20100923 X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 194.171.167.217 X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:61915 Archived-At: Hi all, when Hans introduced the criterium option to \setupnote in recent betas of MkIV, he asked me to wikify the problem of typesetting footnotes in the margin in order to demonstrate the usage of that option. There are, however, two questions I'd like to settle first. For one thing, the new algorithm is still error prone as I can provide examples where it fails. What is the preferred way to point out such a problem (in the wiki or whereever), so it will be delt with eventually? Secondly, can someone please explain to me why the example below produces so strikingly different results when processed with MkII or MkIV? In particular, I'd like to know why the footnote numbers are placed differently and, unless this is due to a bug, how to mimic the MkII behaviour in MkIV. Thanks in advance, Elias \setuplayout[backspace=6cm,width=middle,rightmarginwidth=4cm, rightmargindistance=5mm] \doifelse{MKIV}{\contextmark}{ \setupnote[footnote][location=text,criterium=page, before=,rule=off]}{ \setupnote[footnote][factor=0,before=,rule=off, width=\rightmarginwidth]} \setuptexttexts[margin][][ \vbox to \textheight {\vfill\placenotes[footnote]}] \starttext \showframe \dorecurse{12}{A little more test\footnote{Note the alignment of consecutive lines.} text in order to achieve a certain filling of the page. } \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 ___________________________________________________________________________________