Accepting the caveats Hans pointed out for problematic spacing and some issues with references, you might find [https://github.com/bateni/rawsteps-mkiv] useful.  I ported RawSteps to MkIV and have used it in a few presentations.  The version on github might be buggy, but a good start if you really insist on using RawSteps.

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 9:07 AM Hans Hagen <j.hagen@xs4all.nl> wrote:
On 5/16/2018 9:14 PM, Fabrice L wrote:
> Dear all,
>  > - Check what additional features users want (miss) and decide to what
> extent and with what priority we will put effort in this.
> As asked, I add a wish to the list...
> One feature which I depend a lot on is to be able to do animations: I
> actually use the Raw Steps module, by David Munger (dated from 2006),
> which still worked, but in MKII only. This is essential for me for my
> teaching and talks. During teaching, I have designed courses notes in
> ConText using a lot modes of context: the notes are different for
> the teacher, are available in two formats for the students (paper and
> for completion on tablets), and there is a last version for use in the
> class by me. In class, this is essential for me that the material is
> presented by steps, otherwise students have a tendency to not listen, or
> to not try to solve a problem is the solution is already on the screen.
> I can not use the animation tools available in ConTexT using javascript,
> since I use to show notes in class an iPad, and I use the stylus to fill
> blanks present in the notes (which work great by the way !).
> The facility to use modes in the courses notes like this have convinced
> several of my colleagues to use ConTeXt for their teaching needs.
> Following threads on this list on animations, my understanding is that
> Hans is not a great supporter of the method of animations in the Raw
> Steps module, for technical reasons.
> I have switch to MKIV for others documents, but I'm still on MKII for
> this reason for my courses notes, which are 90% one my needs in TeX.
> Fabrice.
A few remarks:

(1) The mkiv approach uses not that much javascript actually, it uses
layers that get turned on and off and it has a simplicity that i like,
also because there is no interference with repetition (e.g. of
references) cq. are no side effects (like bad spacing). Unfortunately
layers are hardly supported and the trivial javascript to control some
aspects of viewing neither. (Luigi and I have been thinking of adding
lua to a mupdf based viewer ... maybe we should pick up that thread.)

(2) Steps i.e. repetitive content has the problem that one then needs to
make sure references get flushes only ones which also demands care by
the user, and spacing not be influenced too badly by redoing chunks.
This is why I made some explicit steppers (there are some in the mkiv
part as s-present* files).

I can give it some thought but it's not that trivial to do it right
(according to my specs).


                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
        tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
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