Dear list,
I have the following sample:
\definestructureconversionset[cs][0,Greeknumerals,greeknumerals][n] \setupheads[sectionconversionset=cs] \setupinteraction[state=start] \placebookmarks[chapter, section] \starttext
\dorecurse{5}{\chapter{Chapter} \section{Section}}
\stoptext
I cannot get either Greeknumerals or greeknumerals working in PDF bookmarks.
And greeknumerals don’t show numbering in text.
Am I missing something or is this a bug?
Many thanks for your help,
Pablo
Am 07.04.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez oinos@gmx.es:
Dear list,
I have the following sample:
\definestructureconversionset[cs][0,Greeknumerals,greeknumerals][n] \setupheads[sectionconversionset=cs] \setupinteraction[state=start] \placebookmarks[chapter, section] \starttext
\dorecurse{5}{\chapter{Chapter} \section{Section}}
\stoptext
I cannot get either Greeknumerals or greeknumerals working in PDF bookmarks.
\defineconversionset[cs][n,G,g][n]
And greeknumerals don’t show numbering in text.
You need a font with greek letters.
Wolfgang
On 04/07/2014 08:59 PM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Am 07.04.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez:
[...] I cannot get either Greeknumerals or greeknumerals working in PDF bookmarks.
\defineconversionset[cs][n,G,g][n]
Many thanks for your help, Wolfgang.
Since Romannumerals and romannumerals (or Characters and characters) are required, I thought it would be consistent to use Greeknumerals and greeknumerals. But I was obviously wrong.
And greeknumerals don’t show numbering in text.
You need a font with greek letters.
Of course, you’re right. This was a very basic mistake.
I was misled by the fact that Latin Modern has uppercase Greek letters.
Many thanks again for your help,
Pablo
Am 07.04.2014 um 21:18 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez oinos@gmx.es:
On 04/07/2014 08:59 PM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Am 07.04.2014 um 20:45 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez:
[...] I cannot get either Greeknumerals or greeknumerals working in PDF bookmarks.
\defineconversionset[cs][n,G,g][n]
Many thanks for your help, Wolfgang.
Since Romannumerals and romannumerals (or Characters and characters) are required, I thought it would be consistent to use Greeknumerals and greeknumerals. But I was obviously wrong.
This could be a bug because there shouldn’t be a difference between the two conversion names.
Wolfgang
On 7 avr. 2014, at 21:25, Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang@gmail.com wrote:
Am 07.04.2014 um 21:18 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez oinos@gmx.es: […]
Since Romannumerals and romannumerals (or Characters and characters) are required, I thought it would be consistent to use Greeknumerals and greeknumerals. But I was obviously wrong.
This could be a bug because there shouldn’t be a difference between the two conversion names.
Maybe not, since Roman numerals i, ii, iii, iv, etc correspond really to the way Romans used to write numbers, while Greek numerals \alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta, etc are rather our modern way of numbering items, analogous to the case one would say a), b), c), d) etc. Would Thomas Schmitz give us some insight?
Best regards: OK
On 07 Apr 2014, at 23:24, Otared Kavian otared@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe not, since Roman numerals i, ii, iii, iv, etc correspond really to the way Romans used to write numbers, while Greek numerals \alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta, etc are rather our modern way of numbering items, analogous to the case one would say a), b), c), d) etc. Would Thomas Schmitz give us some insight?
In fact, I was wondering what “Greeknumerals” would translate to. The most common system used in antiquity is the “Milesian” system: α=1, β=2 etc., but 6 is expressed by ς; ι=10; ρ=100, with two archaic letters as 90 and 900; this is used in most papyri. There are other systems in use (especially in inscriptions), they involve special characters which most fonts don’t have. The simple system α=1 up to ω=24 is used to number the books in the Homeric epics, so it also has ancient precedents. If we want to be nitpicking, it shouldn’t be called “Greeknumerals,” but rather “Greekalphanumericalconversion,” which sounds like a really snappy, memorable way to express it, don’t you agree?
So: this is just the historical and philological aspect, Greeknumerals will make sense to most users.
All best
Thomas
Am 07.04.2014 um 23:24 schrieb Otared Kavian otared@gmail.com:
On 7 avr. 2014, at 21:25, Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang@gmail.com wrote:
Am 07.04.2014 um 21:18 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez oinos@gmx.es: […]
Since Romannumerals and romannumerals (or Characters and characters) are required, I thought it would be consistent to use Greeknumerals and greeknumerals. But I was obviously wrong.
This could be a bug because there shouldn’t be a difference between the two conversion names.
Maybe not, since Roman numerals i, ii, iii, iv, etc correspond really to the way Romans used to write numbers, while Greek numerals \alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta, etc are rather our modern way of numbering items, analogous to the case one would say a), b), c), d) etc.
I’m speaking about the different results when you use “G” or “Greeknumerals” as name for the conversion in \defineconversionset, while the first works in bookmarks the second doesn’t work even though there is no difference between both names.
Wolfgang
Thanks Thomas and Wolfgang for your attention.
Actually the issue with the name of conversions exist also with Persiannumerals, which in ConTeXt results in the so called « Abjad numerals », instead of resulting in the use of Persian digits (or Eastern Arabic digits).
Best regards: OK
On 8 avr. 2014, at 05:09, Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang@gmail.com wrote:
Am 07.04.2014 um 23:24 schrieb Otared Kavian otared@gmail.com:
On 7 avr. 2014, at 21:25, Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang@gmail.com wrote:
Am 07.04.2014 um 21:18 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez oinos@gmx.es: […]
Since Romannumerals and romannumerals (or Characters and characters) are required, I thought it would be consistent to use Greeknumerals and greeknumerals. But I was obviously wrong.
This could be a bug because there shouldn’t be a difference between the two conversion names.
Maybe not, since Roman numerals i, ii, iii, iv, etc correspond really to the way Romans used to write numbers, while Greek numerals \alpha, \beta, \gamma, \delta, etc are rather our modern way of numbering items, analogous to the case one would say a), b), c), d) etc.
I’m speaking about the different results when you use “G” or “Greeknumerals” as name for the conversion in \defineconversionset, while the first works in bookmarks the second doesn’t work even though there is no difference between both names.
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://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
On 04/08/2014 05:09 AM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
[...] I’m speaking about the different results when you use “G” or “Greeknumerals” as name for the conversion in \defineconversionset, while the first works in bookmarks the second doesn’t work even though there is no difference between both names.
Many thanks, Wolfgang, Otared and Thomas, for your replies.
As a user I don’t understand why \defineconversionset needs complete names for some numerals and initials for others. And this is only required for PDF bookmarks, since everything else works fine.
Here you have an example which shows the original issue:
\defineconversionset[cs][0,Romannumerals,Characters,n,g][n]
PDF bookmarks wouldn’t work with initials only:
\defineconversionset[cs][0,I,a,n,g][n]
You are the experts: wouldn’t it be easier that PDF bookmarks would accept both intials and full names? The required mixture isn’t easier for users.
Many thanks for your help,
Pablo
-
Otared Kavian -
Pablo Rodriguez -
Schmitz Thomas A. -
Wolfgang Schuster