I would suggest to advertise with the ending another trademark that is not a zero-entropy word in the programming world when not randomly capitalized, and, if possible, that is not an everyday English word either. Mkiv is a good choice for the moment. If there would be no Mkvi and so on, it is good forever. Le lun. 3 févr. 2020 à 23:05, Wolfgang Schuster < wolfgang.schuster.lists@gmail.com> a écrit :

Hans Hagen schrieb am 03.02.2020 um 15:28:

...

On 2/3/2020 3:07 PM, Philipp A. wrote:

...

Hi!

Most text editors have LaTeX specific syntax highlighting, so it makes sense to give your ConTeXt file a ending it can be distinguished with. Is there a blessed one?

* .ctx: Would mirror the semi-common .ltx, but is used for XML files inside of ConTeXt itself

context ctx files are xml files indeed

...

* .mkiv: Is that just for ConTeXt or all LuaTeX stuff? Would it make sense to give text documents that extension?

you can do that (or mkvi or lmtx or ...)

...

* Something else? (.tex doesn’t count, it’s shared with LaTeX files and plain TeX files) so then use mkiv

Why not just <FILE>.context

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

___________________________________________________________________________________

Thank you all! What is lmtx? Is there any link with infos? Am Di., 4. Feb. 2020 um 00:53 Uhr schrieb Floris van Manen

:

On 04-02-2020 00:31, Exp wrote:

...

Mkiv is a good choice for the moment. If there would be no Mkvi and so on, it is good forever.

.tex is used for both tex (as well as latex as well as other wrappers).

how about for the new context era: .lmtx

.F

___________________________________________________________________________________ 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

___________________________________________________________________________________

On 2/3/20 3:28 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:

On 2/3/2020 3:07 PM, Philipp A. wrote:

...

Hi!

Most text editors have LaTeX specific syntax highlighting, so it makes sense to give your ConTeXt file a ending it can be distinguished with. Is there a blessed one?

* .ctx: Would mirror the semi-common .ltx, but is used for XML files inside of ConTeXt itself

context ctx files are xml files indeed

...

* .mkiv: Is that just for ConTeXt or all LuaTeX stuff? Would it make sense to give text documents that extension?

you can do that (or mkvi or lmtx or ...)

Since there are already *.mkxl files in the ConTeXt distribution, I think it may make sense to name the LMTX version MkXL. In any case, MkXL is simpler and clearer that MkIV with LMTX. Pablo -- http://www.ousia.tk

Am 2020-02-04 um 20:27 schrieb kaddour kardio :

Since ConTeXT is closer to plain TeX than LaTeX, it is more legitimate to got the "dot tex" than latex :)

I’d suggest to start a war to claim it… HR

On 2/4/2020 8:27 PM, kaddour kardio wrote:

Since ConTeXT is closer to plain TeX than LaTeX, it is more legitimate to got the "dot tex" than latex :)

Le mar. 4 févr. 2020 à 17:57, Pablo Rodriguez mailto:oinos@gmx.es> a écrit :

On 2/3/20 3:28 PM, Hans Hagen wrote: > On 2/3/2020 3:07 PM, Philipp A. wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Most text editors have LaTeX specific syntax highlighting, so it makes >> sense to give your ConTeXt file a ending it can be distinguished with. >> Is there a blessed one? >> >>   * .ctx: Would mirror the semi-common .ltx, but is used for XML files >>     inside of ConTeXt itself > > context ctx files are xml files indeed > >>   * .mkiv: Is that just for ConTeXt or all LuaTeX stuff? Would it make >>     sense to give text documents that extension? > > you can do that (or mkvi or lmtx or ...)

Since there are already *.mkxl files in the ConTeXt distribution, I think it may make sense to name the LMTX version MkXL.

In any case, MkXL is simpler and clearer that MkIV with LMTX. mkiv (four) : files that expect mkiv (or lmtx) mkvi (six) : mkiv (or lmtx) files that pass a filter mkxl (fourty) : files that expect lmtx mklx (sixty) : lmtx files that pass a filter

(there are some more, like template files and so) I suppose that latex syntax highlighting filters support tex and sty and maybe suffixes i'm noti aware of. So a context specific highlighter could support mkiv, mkvi, mkxk and mkvi. At least that's what I do here. Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

Since ConTeXT is closer to plain TeX than LaTeX, it is more legitimate to got the "dot tex" than latex :) I always wonder where such info comes from. Plain tex is a 45K file that is described in the tex book and serves as template for Don Knuths own

On 2/4/2020 8:27 PM, kaddour kardio wrote: styles for his books. Much of it is dedicated to setting up fonts and math. I think it was never meant to be a general purpose macro package but serve as starting point and example of how to apply primitives. Anyway, it's alway interesting to see folws coming up with descriptions of context (or whatever relates to it) which then become kind of truths. In todays terms we shouls say that 'the community has its own influencers' and 'origins of fake news' and ... Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

On 2/5/2020 11:00 AM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:

...

Am 2020-02-05 um 10:24 schrieb Hans Hagen :

On 2/4/2020 8:27 PM, kaddour kardio wrote:

...

Since ConTeXT is closer to plain TeX than LaTeX, it is more legitimate to got the "dot tex" than latex :) I always wonder where such info comes from. Plain tex is a 45K file that is described in the tex book and serves as template for Don Knuths own styles for his books. Much of it is dedicated to setting up fonts and math. I think it was never meant to be a general purpose macro package but serve as starting point and example of how to apply primitives.

Maybe not PlainTeX, but plain TeX.

E.g. we usually use TeX primitives like \def (even if we have \define), while with LaTeX you use \newcommand, similar with \vbox and others.

I understood LuaMetaTeX, as a stripped-down typesetting engine, would be closer to the spirit of Knuth’s TeX than a bloated pdfTeX/LuaTeX.

Indeed, although I admit that I added some primitives that I felt were missing (which is why we will have foo.lmtx source files). Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------