![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/93131e1e6e2204bd13501390d768dbdc.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 17:26:48 -0500 (EST)
Aditya Mahajan
On Sat, 8 Dec 2007, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
just wondering: how many ConTeXt-ers depend on ligatures such as: '' (double quote) and '' (two single quotes) -> right double quote `` -> left double quote
In some old documents. In newer documents I use \quote and \quotation. Then there are documents that need to move back and forth between latex and context but for them I can easily define appropriate macros in latex.
,, -> DOUBLE LOW-9 QUOTATION MARK
We should jeep them for old times sake although I prefer quote and quotation in my document because this is more flexible (change with the language and I can also change the quotation style).
or even more weird ones: !` -> inverted exclam ?` -> inverted question << -> LEFT POINTING GUILLEMET (never heard of that ligature)
-> RIGHT POINTING GUILLEMET
I have never used them.
The two spain ligatures should vanish, I tried once to write [...]?`` in one of my documents and hated this behaviour. The other two ligatures for guillemets another odd things because I < in my document for every < in my source not a replacement.
Some ligatures are handy indeed: -- -> endash --- -> emdash
I use them all the time. Even though the utf encoded values can work here, my editor (vim) using fixed width fonts, so it is easy to miss the difference between hypehn, endash, and emdash (in the markup). So, I would prefer them to be present.
Keep them, they are to usefull. I could also agree to Aditya's explanation.
' -> right single quote (I'm, isn't etc.)
I can automate the conversion of ' to the corresponding utf character inside vim, so this is not really essential. However, IMO this should not change.
Aditya
I nearly never need this in my documents but it is very usefull in I don't want to select the right character. This is also on of the points Word and Powerpoint users select the wrong character but TeX has always the right character :-) Wolfgang