On 2023-01-04 18:45, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 1/4/2023 11:10 PM, Rik Kabel via ntg-context wrote:
No change with the latest (2023.01.04).
Is this a problem with what I am doing, or a bug? well, it's new and not thtat tested ... we need to specify it
This\optionalspace fails unexpectedly with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace \emph{fails unexpectedly} with autoinsertedspace.\par
there can be more variants, like do we want to remove preceding spaces?
we already have:
This\optionalspace, fails unexpectedly with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace, \emph{fails unexpectedly} with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace fails unexpectedly with autoinsertedspace.\par This\optionalspace \emph{fails unexpectedly} with autoinsertedspace.\par
\optionalspace works correctly (that is, as I want it to) for all of my use cases under both MkIV and LMTX. Is there any reason that this should not be used in user documents? I do wonder what characters are considered "punctuation" for the purpose of suppressing the next space. The standard six sentence termination characters (?!.:;,) are honored, and so are many others (quotation marks, including guillemot, square and curly braces, and parens). But sentence opening characters (¿¡) are as well. Vertical bars (|¦) and basic mathematical characters (+-=*) are not treated as punctuation. Where (in the source or manuals) are these to be found? As far as removing leading spaces, I do not see that it is necessary, but it may help create more readable sources. Thank you for the fix. -- Rik