Hi Hans, Currently \nomarking expand into (essentially) \unknown. Is it possible to make that configurable? I now have \section{title\nomarking{\footnote{note}}} \marking[section]{title} and that is rather ugly (or is there a better way?) Taco
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Hi Hans,
Currently \nomarking expand into (essentially) \unknown. Is it possible to make that configurable? I now have
\section{title\nomarking{\footnote{note}}} \marking[section]{title}
and that is rather ugly (or is there a better way?)
it is, kind of; copied from source: %\def\nomarking##1{\unknown\ }% \def\nomarking{\splitsequence{\getvalue{\??mk#1\c!limittext}}}%
Hans Hagen wrote:
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Hi Hans,
Currently \nomarking expand into (essentially) \unknown. Is it possible to make that configurable? I now have
\section{title\nomarking{\footnote{note}}} \marking[section]{title}
and that is rather ugly (or is there a better way?)
it is, kind of; copied from source:
%\def\nomarking##1{\unknown\ }% \def\nomarking{\splitsequence{\getvalue{\??mk#1\c!limittext}}}%
Yes I saw that, but changing the language parameter has side-effects :-) My vote goes to removing the note markers altogether, btw. Footnote symbols just do not belong inside \mark-ed stuff. Cheers, Taco
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Hi Hans,
Currently \nomarking expand into (essentially) \unknown. Is it possible to make that configurable? I now have
\section{title\nomarking{\footnote{note}}} \marking[section]{title}
and that is rather ugly (or is there a better way?)
how about introducing an \everymarking and then \appendtoks \notesenabledfalse \to \everymarking? Hans
participants (2)
-
Hans Hagen
-
Taco Hoekwater