[NTG-context] general suggestion for ConTeXt documentation (was: footnote and endnote markers...)

Robert Zydenbos context at zydenbos.net
Wed Aug 8 00:40:37 CEST 2018


> On 7. Aug 2018, at 17:54, Pablo Rodriguez <oinos at gmx.es> wrote:
> 
> On 08/06/2018 11:59 PM, Robert Zydenbos wrote:
>> Sorry for all these footnote questions, […]
> 
> Hi Robert,
> 
> […]
> 
> I hope it helps,
> 
> Pablo

That is it. I have no idea why – but that is the solution.

(For all readers:)

ConTeXt is great. Let me make that clear right way. I think it's the future of TeX. I'm already doing things in ConTeXt that I dread trying to do in LaTeX or any other system. But (yes, of course there was a 'but' coming) the one thing that is missing, the one obstacle which I think exists for ConTeXt gaining wider currency, is really good documentation.

Take this last question of mine which Pablo solved: I had to put a certain parameter in  \setupnotedefinition  [footnote]. First I did it wrongly, putting it in \setupnote [footnote] (why? because the names of the values, like 'location', look so much alike). So what goes into \setupnotedefinition and what goes into \setupnote? How do I know? (How does Pablo know this? Maybe he can tell me off-list. :-) ) Many of the commands are not, or badly, documented in the otherwise useful Wiki. What are all the parameters that are recognized by the various commands, and just what do they mean? What are the default settings? ConTeXt looks like an object oriented programming language with inheritances, but it is unclear just what is inherited from where, and why.

I appreciate all the effort made by various people to provide documentation and demos. But I think the cause of ConTeXt would be greatly served if someone would bring out a hierarchic list of the ConTeXt commands with a brief description of what the commands and the parameters do and why they exist at all, so that the reader gets an idea of the structure of the whole system and the philosophy behind it (i.e., explaining why it is thus structured and why it works).

Once again: I think ConTeXt is great, and so is this forum, which is a huge help. I also realize ConTeXt is complex and that the great people behind it also have other things to do in life. But still: maybe the kind of documentation I propose would help to make things still a bit greater?

Robert




More information about the ntg-context mailing list