Thansk,

I see. \setupbars doesn't give a hit on ConTeXt-wiki, so I couldn't find this.
Still I dare say, it is a pity that [rulethickness=] gets a different meaning here than elsewhere. I would like to ask to reconsider, because I strongly believe in consistency in the API (though I am ready to admit that it is not easy to maintain and confess guilty myself at more than one occasion). That is either change all rulethickness's everywhere to this scheme or otherwise. Or did this already happened and did I miss that? And of course, the easiest solution would be if the code itself could sort out the difference between having been given a fraction or a length.

Hans van der Meer



On 8 jul. 2012, at 22:44, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:


Am 08.07.2012 um 22:24 schrieb Meer, H. van der:

This gives an error:

\starttext
\setupbars[rulethickness=4pt]
\stoptext

! LuaTeX error <main ctx instance>:1: malformed number near '4pt'.
ConTeXt  ver: 2012.07.04 23:48 MKIV  fmt: 2012.7.6  int: english/english

Elsewhere this is ok, as for example in: \framed[rulethickness=4pt]{}
Strangely in node-rul.mkiv I see: \c!rulethickness=2.5
whereas in pack-rul.mkiv:  \c!rulethickness=\linewidth

I am inclined to spot an error here, or at least an inconsistency in the API.


\setupbars[rulethickness=0.5]

\starttext

\setupbars[unit=ex]\underbar{ex}

\setupbars[unit=em]\underbar{em}

\stoptext

Wolfgang
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl<mailto: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
___________________________________________________________________________________