On Friday 23 October 2009 10:30:09 Bryant Eastham wrote:
Yes, I had looked at all the examples that I could find, I had checked the many references, and could not find documentation on most of the routines that current postings seem to indicate should be used. With the further pointers I have received I will try again, and post my results.
As has been clearly pointed out by this exchange: - ConTeXt MKII is very stable and is pretty well documented. - ConTeXt MKIV is a working system, but is not quite as stable. It is under active development, and this mailing list is principally active concerning this development. It is therefore quite appropriate that current postings turn around features that are not (yet) as well documented as stable MKII. So you should not be surprised to find that the use of "cutting edge" technology gives many exciting new functionality, but one must be willing to put up with some rough edges. This is why, for example, the Debian project has very appropriately named its releases "stable", "testing" and "unstable" (as well as "experimental"). Unstable sometimes breaks, but usually this lasts only a couple of hours (occasionally a couple of days for less important problems). Alan P.S. I just spent several hours using Microsoft Word to edit a bunch of administrative documents. The task would have taken 10 minutes or so using ConTeXt and my usual tools (there were many repetitive edits). This was a *horrible* experience and I simply cannot fathom how one can be satisfied with such a work tool! (Here, I had no choice.)