On 6-11-2012 16:15, James Holsenback wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 10:11 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 6-11-2012 16:04, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> Semantic trouble  :-)
>>>
>>> This is what I mean: It should /not/ be the full image. The commands do
>>> not work. While +SR0.n and +ER0.n work correctly.
>>>
>>
>> I am still not making myself clear enough.
>>
>> +Sn, +S0.n, +En, +E0.n are /unexisting/ commands which should be removed
>> from the list at the start of the paragraph.
>>
>> Thomas
>>
> well at this point I'm not 100% sure ... given what else I've
> discovered. I'm just saying ... is there a chance that those variants
> ARE legit ... parser doesn't seem to care.

Well, parser /did/ care for +Sn and +En in my system, but not 
anymore.... However, they do /not/ do their job. The full image is 
rendered instead of the part in-between asked for. Same story for +S0.n 
and +E0.n (percentages).

Also note that +S and +E are /not/ available in the index, while +SR and 
+ER are..

My impression is that they are relicts from the 3.6 version and have 
been deactivated as they are redundant with +SRn and +ERn, respectively 
+SR0.n and +ER0.n

Thomas

Post a reply to this message