From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/26462 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Aditya Mahajan Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: Help : Unknown references Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:57:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <44205718.6000500@cs.com> <44217C48.3010204@cs.com> <44218198.8090202@elvenkind.com> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1143064708 11477 80.91.229.2 (22 Mar 2006 21:58:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:58:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mailing list for ConTeXt users Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Wed Mar 22 22:58:21 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FMBLL-0003OC-KZ for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47A1C1279A; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:13 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 12889-06; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:07 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8551278E; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:07 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30E51278E for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:05 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 13113-04 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:03 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from pushingtin.mr.itd.umich.edu (pushingtin.mr.itd.umich.edu [141.211.14.78]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with SMTP id 745BC1276C for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:58:02 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from eecs4327u07.engin.umich.edu (eecs4327u07.engin.umich.edu [141.213.51.135]) by pushingtin.mr.itd.umich.edu (smtp) with ESMTP id k2MLvvSo023470; Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:57:57 -0500 X-X-Sender: adityam@eecs4327u07.engin.umich.edu Original-To: Taco Hoekwater In-Reply-To: <44218198.8090202@elvenkind.com> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.7 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 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:26462 Archived-At: On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Taco Hoekwater wrote: > WN wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I think I am using the latest context version > >> I cannot see any difference in the setup. I must be doing something >> basically wrong ??? > > There is a bug, and it is caused by the embedded \startalign > environment. Minimal file: > > \starttext > \placeformula[eqn1] > \startformula \startalign[n=1] a\\ \stopalign \stopformula > See \in[eqn1] > \stoptext To WN, quick workaround, use \NR construct rather than \\. \starttext \placeformula \startformula \startalign[n=1] a \NR[eqn1] \stopalign \stopformula \stoptext >>From what I understand, Hans said that this loose label was an ugly method to refer to equations. Consider \placeformula[eq1] \startformula \startalign[n=1] eqn 1 \NR eqn 2 \NR \stopalign \stopformula What should eq1 refer to? The first equation or the second? The "correct" way is to specify which one you want to be refered, so \placeformula \startformula \startalign[n=1] eqn 1 \NR[eq1] eqn 2 \NR \stopalign \stopformula And this does work correctly. Actually, there is another problem. Consider this \placeformula \startformula \startalign \NC ... \NC ... \NR \NC ... \NC ....\NR \NC ... \NC ... \NR \stopalign \stopformula vs \placeformula \startformula \startalign \NC ..\NC ... \NR \NC ..\NC ... \NR[+] \stopalign \stopformula The second construct should only number the second equation, and it does exactly that. The first does not number any equation, which is also the correct and expected behaviour. Now suppose that I want to number all equations. I am pretty sure that this used to work (can't check at the moment, as I have upgraded context) \placeformula[+] \startformula \startalign \NC ... \NC ... \NR \NC ... \NR ... \NR \stopalign \stopformula However, this is no longer working? How do I number all the equations in a multiline formula, without doing a \NR[+] at each line? Aditya