![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/adf1b6085515459d1ea446f4bf2c673a.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Well, Hraban, you say that \directsetup makes no sense any more in LMTX, but in this case (I use LMTX, not MKIV) I tried it without \directsetup, it did not work and furthermore I got an error. That is why I commented that I did not understand what \directsetup really does (or doesn't do as you are suggesting). For now the immediate problem is resolved, and I am happy about that, but I don't understand why it works with \directsetup but not without it in LMTX (my version December last year) Julian On 24/4/23 17:33, Henning Hraban Ramm via ntg-context wrote:
Am 23.04.23 um 23:36 schrieb jbf via ntg-context:
I tried all those Hraban, unsuccessfully, but finally 'happened' upon a solution by trying whitespace instead in the setups. Except that I had read somewhere in the mailing list (Pablo I think) that I would need to use \directsetup. I don't actually understand why, have never been sure about what \directsetup does, but there's no doubt it works in this case! So the following has done what I needed:
I’m sorry, I didn’t test my suggestion.
In MkIV, \directsetup or \fastsetup are a bit faster than \setup. They can load only one setup and catch less errors. In LMTX, they don’t make sense any more.
Hraban ___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : https://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________