[NTG-context] Reviewing old messages

Meer, Hans van der H.vanderMeer at uva.nl
Mon May 16 16:31:33 CEST 2016


Thanks.

I redid the examples with the autostrut parameter set to respectively yes and no. In the former case I see all have an hbox and in the latter case all have a vbox. So it seems not the align, but the strut being the one determining the box variant.

Hans van der Meer




On 16 May 2016, at 16:03, Wolfgang Schuster <schuster.wolfgang at gmail.com<mailto:schuster.wolfgang at gmail.com>> wrote:

Meer, Hans van der<mailto:H.vanderMeer at uva.nl>
16. Mai 2016 um 15:50
Sifting through my TeX-mailbox, I came along this post of Wolfgang Schuster and decided to try all variations given to the align parameter on \framed.
Curious in which cases the \hbox and in which the \vbox is chosen, not unimportant of course.
I did this by typesetting \hbox{abc}\hbox{xyz} inside a framed. For \hbox want expects abcxyz as output and for \vbox abc and below it xyz. As can be seen in the first two examples.
To my surprise none of the \framed[align=..] options exhibits \vbox character!

Thus my question: has the behaviour of \framed[align=..] changed in the mean time? Three years is of course an eternity when seen in the perspective of the speed with which ConTeXt is evolving 😃. Or is there another reason why the \vbox effect is not shown in any of the examples?
\framed adds a \strut at the begin and end of the content.

\starttext

\vbox{\hbox{First}\hbox{Second}}

\vbox{\strut\hbox{First}\hbox{Second}}

\framed[align=flushleft]{\hbox{First}\hbox{Second}}

\framed[align=flushleft,strut=no,autostrut=no]{\hbox{First}\hbox{Second}}

\stoptext

Wolfgang
___________________________________________________________________________________

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ntg.nl/pipermail/ntg-context/attachments/20160516/b60ef276/attachment.html>


More information about the ntg-context mailing list