From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/42140 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?B?SWRyaXMgU2FtYXdpIEhhbWlkINin2K/YsdmK2LMg2LPZhdin2YjZiiDYrQ==?= =?utf-8?B?2KfZhdiv?= Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: luatex feature question/request Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:38:19 -0600 Organization: Colorado State University Message-ID: References: <20080704105426.GA6097@atos.labs.wmid.amu.edu.pl> <20080704150113.GC1895@blackowl.org> 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: ger.gmane.org 1215193070 15117 80.91.229.12 (4 Jul 2008 17:37:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 17:37:50 +0000 (UTC) To: "mailing list for ConTeXt users" Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Fri Jul 04 19:38:35 2008 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 lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KEpEr-00064C-MM for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:38:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2D8C1FE90; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:37:32 +0200 (CEST) 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 25189-02-5; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:37:22 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E273D1FE8D; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:37:21 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E67E1FE8D for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:37:21 +0200 (CEST) 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 25189-02-4 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:36:53 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from trueband.net (director.trueband.net [216.163.120.8]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with SMTP id 30BB11FB30 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:36:52 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: (qmail 27963 invoked by uid 1006); 4 Jul 2008 17:36:51 -0000 Original-Received: from ishamid@colostate.edu by rs0 by uid 1003 with qmail-scanner-1.16 (spamassassin: 3.1.4. Clear:SA:0(0.1/100.0):. Processed in 0.205134 secs); 04 Jul 2008 17:36:51 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO trueband.net) (172.16.0.6) by -v with SMTP; 4 Jul 2008 17:36:51 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 27871 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2008 17:36:49 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO your-b27fb1c401) (ishamid@75.104.82.252) by -v with SMTP; 4 Jul 2008 17:36:49 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20080704150113.GC1895@blackowl.org> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.50 (Win32) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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:42140 Archived-At: On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:01:13 -0600, Olivier wrote: >> Interesting, I was thinking about something similar recently: >> >> A user should be able to define or augment a database such that >> many-to-most ties are done automatically: > > I am a bit affraid by such a feature: there are cases where it is hard > to decide (automatically, because it means going down to the grammatical > level) if a tie has to be added or not. Therefore the end user always > have to choose the right thing to do: in one case, he has to add ties > when needed, in the suggested case he has to remove them. It seems to me > that the original problem is transformed into another dual one. > (Of course, this might prove useful if there are less exceptions in the > end, but I'm a bit sceptical.) Thus, it should be a completely configurable by the user, then the user can manage the exceptions. Based on my experience, it would save time to have the option of a general framework -- and deal with the 10%+/- of exceptions, than to have to enter every tie manually, and then proofread to make sure you got the 90%+/- right. I'm sure we could come up with a reasonable, flexible framework for this... Best wishes Idris -- Professor Idris Samawi Hamid, Editor-in-Chief International Journal of Shi`i Studies Department of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________