I really should have fiddled with this before thanking you, Wolfgang. I was focused on catching up on email etc. this morning. Thanks for trying though! Your "answer" is pretty much coded code to me. I don't understand it and don't have the first notion of how to implement it in my file. For one thing, I have no clue what "ttbf" means. Can't find it on the wiki or in the manuals. Google says it's the Texas Teen Book Festival but I'm guessing that ain't it. ??? Thanks anyway! -----Original Message----- From: ntg-context [mailto:ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Schuster Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 1:14 PM To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Subject: Re: [NTG-context] spacing before items Mike Cooper schrieb am 16.06.2020 um 19:51:

Hello list,

Another very simple issue—no doubt the answer is right in front of me but I can’t find it or figure it out…

(Please let me know where it is!)

I want more space before each top-level item.MWE:

\defineitemgroup[mdshw][levels=2]

\setupitemgroup[mdshw][1][n]

\setupitemgroup[mdshw][2][a, packed, 1*broad][left=(, right=), stopper=]

\starttext

\startsection{First Section}

\startsection[title={...}] The first entry uses the "before" value while inner entries use "inbetween". \starttext \setupitemgroup [itemize][1] [ before={\endgraf{\ttbf [before]}\endgraf}, inbetween={\endgraf{\ttbf [inbetween]}\endgraf}, after={\endgraf{\ttbf [after]}\endgraf}] \startitemize \startitem Choose the correct answer. \startitemize \item This one \item This one \stopitemize \stopitem \startitem Choose the correct answer. \startitemize \item This one \item This one \stopitemize \stopitem \stopitemize \stoptext Wolfgang ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________

Yes, I did try it. It put "[before]" (in ttbf (thanks for the hint!)) on the previously blank line before the first top-level item. And it put "[inbetween]" in the other previously blank lines between both level of items, and "[after]" into the previously blank line after the last item. Spacing was not affected at all, only mysterious words in square brackets showed up in the output. ?? -----Original Message----- From: ntg-context [mailto:ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl] On Behalf Of Henning Hraban Ramm Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 2:27 PM To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Subject: Re: [NTG-context] spacing before items

Am 17.06.2020 um 21:50 schrieb Mike Cooper :

For one thing, I have no clue what "ttbf" means. Can't find it on the wiki or in the manuals. Google says it's the Texas Teen Book Festival but I'm guessing that ain't it. ???

Did you try it? (Hint: There’s \tt and \bf ...) HR ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________

OK. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to guess that. I am a rank beginner and while there are breakthroughs now and then, frustration is still the main thing I experience trying to learn/use ConTeXt... In any case, my original question is still not solved. The before/inbetween keys add space everywhere. I only want space between top-level items. Here is something like what I need, with the spacing exaggerated: 1. Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… Multi-line, involved question… What’s the answer? a. An answer that may well wrap onto a second or even third line but is usually half a line or less. b. By the time the data has been accurately analyzed, critical failure has already occurred. c. Seven bands must be hired to adequately bring the funk. 2. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. Another question with detailed data and information and scenario. What’s the correct action to take? a. Create a spreadsheet which compiles the salient data into a logical order/layout, perform calculations and analysis then search the internet for a solution. b. Immediately report the data to the supervisory team. c. File the data in the relevant, appropriate locations, complete a standardized company report form, notify all vested parties, raise the flags, abandon ship. 3. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. Yet another of the same. What would you do? a. Run b. Walk c. Crawl I want the top-level chunks to be visually separated for better readability, etc. -----Original Message----- From: ntg-context [mailto:ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Schuster Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 2:45 PM To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Subject: Re: [NTG-context] spacing before items Mike Cooper schrieb am 17.06.2020 um 21:50:

I really should have fiddled with this before thanking you, Wolfgang. I was focused on catching up on email etc. this morning.

Thanks for trying though!

Your "answer" is pretty much coded code to me. I don't understand it and don't have the first notion of how to implement it in my file. For one thing, I have no clue what "ttbf" means. Can't find it on the wiki or in the manuals. Google says it's the Texas Teen Book Festival but I'm guessing that ain't it. ???

My example shows which key is used for which space around each item. To insert vertical space you have to use the \blank command and set a value in the optional argument, e.g. \blank[1cm]. To insert now a space of 1cm before the first item you need the "before" key with \blank as argument: \setupitemgroup[mdshw][1][before={\blank[1cm]}] Wolfgang ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________

Mike Cooper writes:

Thanks Tomáš!

1. Where can this solution be found?

Mike, I know how you feel. The reasons that the documentation is so sparse and difficult to find are the same reasons behind a lot of things: time, money, and ability. Good documentation requires all three of those things to be brought together at the same time. Some people reading and responding here have two out of the three, but it's rare to find someone who has all three at the same time. On second thought, there are at least five things required: time, money, ability, desire, and a workable plan. And with ConTeXt being developed by a relatively tiny group, even if a brilliant and kind organizer came along and said "I want excellent documentation for ConTeXt, and I'll pay a fortune to the person who knows how to write it - see, here's the money" - there's no way of guaranteeing that someone would actually take the offer. -- David

On 6/24/2020 12:00 AM, Mike Cooper wrote:

...

-----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of David Rogers Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 3:18 PM

Mike Cooper writes:

...

Thanks Tomáš!

1. Where can this solution be found?

Mike, I know how you feel. The reasons that the documentation is so sparse and difficult to find are the same reasons behind a lot of things: time, money, and ability. Good documentation requires all three of those things to be brought together at the same time. Some people reading and responding here have two out of the three, but it's rare to find someone who has all three at the same time.

On second thought, there are at least five things required: time, money, ability, desire, and a workable plan. And with ConTeXt being developed by a relatively tiny group, even if a brilliant and kind organizer came along and said "I want excellent documentation for ConTeXt, and I'll pay a fortune to the person who knows how to write it - see, here's the money" - there's no way of guaranteeing that someone would actually take the offer.

...

David

Indeed. It's all volunteer work that doesn't pay the bills. Sitting down and starting to write a big manual simply doesn't pay off so it has to happen in free time. And that being the case, it is more attactive to work on some new challenge. Concerning manuals: I sometimes wonder if they are really read. So, how to set up one that works for all, build up explanations, etc ... isn't it more about googling a solution nowadays (ok, not entirely true i guess, as one then has to learn how to distinguish the wrong solutions from the good, but i suppose one can just test it). It has been said before: one can have manuals, wikis, mailing lists, journals ... once they cross the beginners level they also become large and hard to navigate. One can have 'beginners' and 'advanced' but who wants to be a 'beginner' ... when is the line crossed. Maybe on the wiky we should actually have that distinction.

Thanks David!

I don't think I've ever been quite so frustrated at trying to learn anything else in my life! If it wasn't required by my job, I wouldn't have made it past the first day or two (3 months ago). But I'm slogging away and it's gradually coming together (I think). I spent my whole day yesterday figuring out how to do some very basic formatting/layout that would have taken 5-10 minutes in Word or HTML/CSS.

People have been very helpful and patient with me!! Thanks to all of you for that!

Let me challenge you: how would your solution translate to a wiki page for a beginner with the sam eproblem to solve ... content but also the 'how to get there aspect'

And thanks David for this explanation of the situation. There are a couple of things that you need to keep in mind when you start with something like context:

- you often bring with your experience (and exposure) to different systems and these don't translate; recently i was playing with some css setup for a rather complex xml -> html mapping and things that would have taken me 5 minutes in tex costs me plenty of time in css due to all kind of interactions; just as with tex, one can end up with hacks found on the web (it was hobyism of course) - often one starts using something like tex in order to do something that is not really 'beginners' stuff (cue: always test something new or explore a command in a one page small test file!) .. the extremes are: i do this complex book layout in 'indesign' (manual work) but how can i do it (fully automatic) in tex (and i have to have it running next week) and btw, i have xml inout that has flaws - in typesetting all kind of mechanisms are involved, it's an ecosystem and all can work with all and interfere with all ... comparing with word/css is a bit tricky as tex systems are meant for automatic flows (with of course local tuning but then we enter what-you-program-is-what-you-get) and dtp is klick and point and choices on the spot .. i think one can safely say that tex has a longer learning curve but that gets compensated in the end (it compares to typing: who takes a few week typing course in order to benefit later ... most start with two fingers and do that their whole live) .. tex has been qualified as a live-long toolkit: it takes a while but after that you use if your whole live (which is posisble because it stays around) - if one is happy with word and it does what it does better and faster .. don't use tex; i admit that i never used word but then, i never had to make documents of that kind (just like i alway suse metapost and never used a drawing program as i never needed that kind of graphics) - in context you need to think rather minimalistic: most styles can actually be rather small once you realize that a lot of configuration keys are similar (there is no need to document 'before' or 'style' with each comand ... most beginners styles have too much code - in addition to manuals (the ones that i write are often around some specific mechanism and they only make sense then when you need something like that) there is suite of small test files .. one can learn from that too i think - a lot of solutions in the end converge to a similar investment of time independent of the tools ... of course the kind of solutions and satisfaction can differ Hans ps. With context having lua on board: i often see lua code that 'just does the job' but is not really good code. The thing is that in a programming language one can just keep adding lines to deal with exceptions or corner cases for that solution. The code doesn't have to work with other code and so that doesn't hurt. If it runs slower? Fine. TeX is different, you can add some lines of code and a month later someone elses document can come out weird (e.g. around a page break). Fix a font and ... there is no simple solution for that. The problem is that 'slower code' doesn't hurt but seeing different output' does. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

Am 24.06.2020 um 19:41 schrieb Mike Cooper :

...

<Hans> Indeed. It's all volunteer work that doesn't pay the bills. Sitting down and starting to write a big manual simply doesn't pay off so it has to happen in free time. And that being the case, it is more attactive to work on some new challenge.

Concerning manuals: I sometimes wonder if they are really read. So, how to set up one that works for all, build up explanations, etc ... isn't it more about googling a solution nowadays (ok, not entirely true i guess, as one then has to learn how to distinguish the wrong solutions from the good, but i suppose one can just test it).

Most of you know I’m writing at this German ConTeXt book since years... I use the incomplete version myself a lot, and I very much hope that at least every second German TeX user will buy it ;) And of course it’s a lot of work – while Hans, Wolfgang and Taco (and a few otehrs) know their code, I must look up every option, try to find a short description or come up with a test case, so that I understand what’s going on to write it down for others. (Often parallelly for the book in Germand and for the wiki in English.) And far too often I give up because I can’t make something work – mostly because I didn’t understand some fundamental concept (expansion...), but sometimes features just don’t work as advertised/documented (like columnsets). Googling is necessary and helpful for LaTeX, but there aren’t so many blog or forum entries about ConTeXt.

I started out maybe a little bit hodge-podge, looking through some documentation recommended to me. The basic concept is very straightforward. No problem. But implementation has been extremely challenging (but it's probably just me!). Then I was pointed to Henri Menke's "Definitive Guide" post. I read the entire Excursion (though I confess I did not *practice* as I went along (partly because SciTe was such a pain)). The Excursion is not for (true) beginners. And, no offense, but I thought it was poorly typeset as well...

I think it doesn’t make a lot of sense to try to understand the whole thing at once. You need to start small with a project and some basic structuring, then add your style requirements one after the other. If you come from a layout background like me, some “advanced“ stuff is really easy in ConTeXt, while seemingly basic stuff is very hard. The mindset of a command-based typesetting system is fundamentally different from that of a layout program or word processor – even if you can do a lot of the same tasks with each.

Then I went through Aditya's "amazing tutorial" (mostly with a good bit of help from Aditya just to be able to get started!) and definitely learned more. But at the end I felt like it was mostly an exercise in "slow-motion copy/paste" (I retyped all the code). Of course, when I got the code right, I got the intended output. I did fiddle with options a little bit as I went. No doubt, I should have done more. There was too much of what I had "successfully" done that I still didn't really understand at the end of it.

A typesetting system like ConTeXt is as much a tool for professionals as a layout program like InDesign. And even a word processor is better used by professionals who understand what they’re doing. Each system is also usable by beginners (TeX not so much) – but they can’t expect to get professional results immediately. With TeX, footnotes, ToCs and indexes are beginner stuff, while they’re quite advanced with InDesign or Word. Styling your work is much easier in a visual programm – while you do it manually. For ConTeXt you need on one hand the mindset of a programmer, on the other hand that of a media designer. Using LaTeX you can choose a readymade style (class), but with ConTeXt you define your own – it’s easier, but still challenging. I think ConTeXt has a similar problem as Objective C: It might be superior to C++, but every introduction into ObjC assumes you are familiar with ANSI C or C++. But if ObjC is so great, why should I bother learning the other? Most ConTeXt users used LaTeX or plain TeX before. They have to re-learn a lot, but they know a bit about how TeX thinks and works, and they know the limitations of LaTeX. There is more beginner level documentation for ConTeXt than for ObjC, but we still assume a basic familiarity with TeX and principles of design and typography. With my book I’m trying to start without prior knowledge, even if I know most of my readers will come from LaTeX. But I still include sections about working on the command line or choosing a text editor and a lot of basic design/typography knowledge. I want it to really enable someone with usual office experience to start with ConTeXt. On the other hand I’d like to show what’s possible and what I find interesting. And that leads to:

...

It has been said before: one can have manuals, wikis, mailing lists, journals ... once they cross the beginners level they also become large and hard to navigate. One can have 'beginners' and 'advanced' but who wants to be a 'beginner' ... when is the line crossed. Maybe on the wiky we should actually have that distinction.

It very much depends on your background what you regard beginner or advanced level. I’m a media designer and not a (computer) scientist, so I don’t need complex formulae, and I don’t know how to describe graphics as curve sections or such, and I can’t come up with good algorithms. But I’d like to place images on a design grid and fit them to size (maybe even consider the topical focus area) – basic in InDesign, nearly impossible in LaTeX, still very advanced in ConTeXt (with Lua). Regarding “large and hard to navigate”: It’s sometimes a tough decision what to include in my book and what not, and even more how to order the topics. While I know I need to explain e.g. basic font switching before OpenType features and frames before tables because of the dependencies, I still want to keep topics together, even if the advanced stuff of one topic depends on later chapters. And I don’t want to have too many chapters (also not very different sizes), so I put things together that make sense in *my* mind (e.g. titling levels and enumerations, it’s all basic structuring), but it’s unavoidable that some readers will find that confusing. (I try to compensate with good indexes.) Would it make sense to show examples for every possible combination of options? Maybe for users that need to *see* what they’re looking for, but that would unproportionally bloat the book: I want to stop at 400 pages (still at around 270). Such examples would make sense in the wiki, but it’s too boring and tedious writing them...

...

...

I don't think I've ever been quite so frustrated at trying to learn anything else in my life! If it wasn't required by my job, I wouldn't have made it past the first day or two (3 months ago). But I'm slogging away and it's gradually coming together (I think). I spent my whole day yesterday figuring out how to do some very basic formatting/layout that would have taken 5-10 minutes in Word or HTML/CSS.

But I’m quite sure if you figured it out on your own, you know how to do it next time. Or if you forget, you can look for your own solution (I recur to my old environments all the time). May I ask what kind of job requires you to learn ConTeXt? That’s rare.

Off the top of my head, I would suggest more explanation/description and especially more examples of what each option/key/whatever does.

See above: It would make sense, but somebody would need to do it, and it’s very tedious. There are hundreds of setup commands, each with many options, each with different values... And some options behave differently depending on other setups or work only under certain circumstances...

I've always found w3chools.com to be especially helpful with HTML/CSS because they give plenty of examples and explanation.

Please don’t use w3fools! It’s full of errors and bad practice. (At least it was some years before; I can’t imagine it got fundamentally better.)

I don't know if it's really feasible to do anything about it but another thing is the jargon. I probably mainly think in terms of HTML/CSS lingo and then MS Word. When I hunt through the wiki or the manuals or Google for solutions, I naturally use the terms I know. But it seems that the things I've wanted are referred to differently in ConTeXt. I spent *days* trying to figure out how to add more whitespace around a floated graphic (the default is too cramped in my opinion). I finally just threw up my hands and decided that no one else has this opinion but me so nobody has ever "fixed" it and thus, no solution exists.

Hm, did you try the margin options of https://wiki.contextgarden.net/Command/setupfloat ? I agree you need to get used to the “lingo”. But that’s the same with every programming language or big library (like .NET or QT). Even more if you need to combine different techniques (like e.g. ConTeXt behind a Django web application that uses a Meteor frontend; i.e. TeX, Lua, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript/CoffeeScript, CSS/SASS, SQL, git, NginX/Apache, deployment tools etc.). While I’m used to ConTeXt jargon since 20 years, it helps that I’m also used to general typesetting and design jargon. But there’s still a lot I don’t understand or I must search for.

I don't mean to be a jerk or anything. I'm trying to learn this stuff. It's just extremely frustrating...

The learning curve *is* steep and stays steep for a long while, depending on your requirements. Good luck! Hraban www.fiee.net / www.dreiviertelhaus.de

Am 24.06.2020 um 23:11 schrieb Mike Cooper :

...

Most of you know I’m writing at this German ConTeXt book since years... I use the incomplete version myself a lot, and I very much hope that at least every second German TeX user will buy it ;)

Awesome! Keep at it! Maybe when there's an English version, I'll still need it! :-)

Even if I did plan an English version, I don’t think it will happen... First I need to complete the German version.

...

With TeX, footnotes, ToCs and indexes are beginner stuff, while they’re quite advanced with InDesign or Word. Styling your work is much easier in a visual programm – while you do it manually.

Hmmm... I don't find those things to be at all advanced in Word. ???

It’s easier in Word (or LibreOffice) than in InDesign, true. Never tried to make an index in LO/Word. But ToCs in word processors tend to get messed up, as other stuff like image placement.

...

May I ask what kind of job requires you to learn ConTeXt? That’s rare.

Haha! I now work with Jan Willem Flamma (who is on this list) in the training industry. He tells me that using ConTeXt with XML will give us a modularity to our training content such that a modification in one place is more or less automatically taken care of for every course manual that uses that content. (At least that's my current understanding.) So I've been trying to learn ConTeXt and now slowly chipping away at coding one of our smaller homework chapters.

It’s at least possible to make it efficient. I never use XML input but mostly convert DOCX to ConTeXt and work in that. My main job ATM is with technical documentation on a specialized LaTeX3 system: several similar machines, several translations, i.e. modularity pays off. At a former job (newspaper prepress admin) I prepared training material on Acrobat Pro using ConTeXt; presentations and handouts in the same documents, using modes. All the best, Hraban

-----Original Message----- From: ntg-context [mailto:ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl] On Behalf Of David Rogers Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 12:29 PM

You may already be doing what I'm about to suggest. If so, please disregard.

Thanks again David! IIRC, I did find one solution this way. I think the biggest challenge with this approach is, as you mention, learning the best search keywords. I think that should improve over time. Thank you for this good advice!