Since ConTeXT is closer to plain TeX than LaTeX, it is more legitimate to
got the "dot tex" than latex :)
Le mar. 4 févr. 2020 à 17:57, Pablo Rodriguez
On 2/3/20 3:28 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 2/3/2020 3:07 PM, Philipp A. wrote:
Hi!
Most text editors have LaTeX specific syntax highlighting, so it makes sense to give your ConTeXt file a ending it can be distinguished with. Is there a blessed one?
* .ctx: Would mirror the semi-common .ltx, but is used for XML files inside of ConTeXt itself
context ctx files are xml files indeed
* .mkiv: Is that just for ConTeXt or all LuaTeX stuff? Would it make sense to give text documents that extension?
you can do that (or mkvi or lmtx or ...)
Since there are already *.mkxl files in the ConTeXt distribution, I think it may make sense to name the LMTX version MkXL.
In any case, MkXL is simpler and clearer that MkIV with LMTX.
Pablo -- http://www.ousia.tk
___________________________________________________________________________________ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________