\caption indeed accepted arguments with \par (because KOMA-Script did not touch \caption itself), but KOMA-Script wasn't able to process them, i.e., using a paragraph resulted in an error inside \@settodim. A somehow "strange error", because it was hard to understand. Hm, but yes, in combination with package caption paragraphs have been possible. Maybe I can support it, but this would result again in the "less than perfect" error messages at strange places, when not using package caption. But wouldn't...
\caption indeed accepted arguments with \par (because KOMA-Script did not touch \caption itself), but KOMA-Script wasn't able to process them, i.e., using a paragraph resulted in an error inside \@settodim. A somehow "strange error", because it was hard to understand. Hm, but yes, in combination with package caption paragraphs have been possible. Maybe I can support it, but this would result again in the "less than perfect" error messages at strange places, when not using package caption. But wouldn't...
\caption indeed accepted arguments with \par (because KOMA-Script did not touch \caption itself), but KOMA-Script wasn't able to process them, i.e., using a paragraph resulted in an error inside \@settodim. A somehow "strange error", because it was hard to understand. Hm, but yes, in combination with package caption paragraphs have been possible. Maybe I can support it, but this would result again in the "less than perfect" error messages at strange places, when not using package caption. But wouldn't...
\caption indeed accepted arguments with \par (because KOMA-Script did not touch \caption itself), but KOMA-Script wasn't able to process them, i.e., using a paragraph resulted in an error inside \@settodim. A somehow "strange error", because it was hard to understand. Hm, but yes, in combination with package caption paragraphs have been possible. Maybe I can support it, but this would result again in the "less than perfect" error messages at strange places, when not using package caption. But maybe...
long argument for \caption, \captionabove, \captionbelow etc.
Releases
Release 3.49
Release 3.48
Release 3.49
Release 3.50
Releases
Release 3.48
Release 3.49
Release 3.50
Release 3.50
release 3.49
release 3.49
prepared for release 3.49
The code in scrkernel-footnotes.dtx is used only in scrextend. I've changed it in [r4245] to use xpatch if available, try also etoolbox of only this one is available and use hard coded redefinition in other cases.
Patching using etoolbox or xpatch
The code in scrkernel-footnotes.dtx is used only in scrextend. I've changed it in [r4225] to use xpatch if available, try also etoolbox of only this one is available and use hard coded redefinition in other cases.
patching uses xpatch if available → [#61]
replacing eso-pic
Suggesting `tocafterskip` option for `\RedeclareSectionCommand`
Feature Request: Customizable vertical space before \closing in scrlttr2
documentation occasionally misspells “scrreprt” as “scrreport”
documentation occasionally misspells “scrreprt” as “scrreport”
Thank you for reporting. It was an translation mistake corrected in [r4244].
scrreport → scrreprt as reported in issue [#100]
documentation occasionally misspells “scrreprt” as “scrreport”
preface changed for v3.49
Release 3.49
Release 3.49
Warning_captionUnknownClass
Warning_captionUnknownClass
change note added
\newcommand replaced by \providecommand for compatibility with contract 0.91
deprecated commands moved from package contract
Experimenting with extended templates for ToC styles
new branch for Markus' experiments with tocbasic
fake \caption@documentclass to avoid misleading warning
Feature Request: Customizable vertical space before \closing in scrlttr2
Feature Request: Customizable vertical space before \closing in scrlttr2
caption package: starred \caption not longer works with KOMA
Should be fixed in [r4236].
Thank you for the report. Indeed caption does not support \caption* with optional argument. So it is wrong to use it: \documentclass{scrartcl} \usepackage{caption} \ExplSyntaxOn \RenewDocumentCommand \__tocbasic_caption:w { s o m } { \__tocbasic_tocbasic_caption_setup: \exp_last_unbraced:Ne \__tocbasic_saved_caption:w { \IfBooleanT{#1} * \IfValueT{#2} {\exp_not:n{[#2]}} } { #3 } \hook_use:n { tocbasic / caption / after } } \ExplSyntaxOff \begin{document} \begin{table} blub \caption*{table key, not...
\caption and \captionof pass optional argument only if used
caption package: starred \caption not longer works with KOMA
missing activation of layerized page style in \thispagestyle
docu fix
automatic conversion of page styles into layer page styles
From the introduction of the scrlayer-notecolumn package in chapter ”Note Columns with scrlayer-notecolumn“ in the English KOMA-Script guide: The scrlayer-notecolumn package should solve all these problems. To do so, it relies on the basic functionality of scrlayer. However, using this package has a drawback: you can only output notes on pages that use a page style based on scrlayer. This disadvantage, however, can easily be resolved, or even turned into an advantage, with the help of scrlayer-scrpage....
In [r4232] I've added another warning to scrlayer-scrpage: Package scrlayer-scrpage Warning: Detected \makenote at page with non-layer (scrlayer-scrpage) page style. (scrlayer-scrpage) Delayed or too early output of the note is (scrlayer-scrpage) expected and not a bug in such cases. Even (scrlayer-scrpage) flipping notes without terminating states (scrlayer-scrpage) would be possible and not a bug. (scrlayer-scrpage) Redefinition of all used page styles to (scrlayer-scrpage) layer page styles would...
additional page style warning
I get a warning message: Package scrlayer-notecolumn Warning: \clearnotecolumns while active non-layer page style. (scrlayer-notecolumn) Activate empty page style until note column (scrlayer-notecolumn) has been cleared on input line 13. From the introduction of the scrlayer-notecolumn package in chapter ”Note Columns with scrlayer-notecolumn“ in the English KOMA-Script guide: The scrlayer-notecolumn package should solve all these problems. To do so, it relies on the basic functionality of scrlayer....
Thanks for the detailed reply and clarifications, Markus! My erroneous interpretation of the manual was that the loading the scrlayer package was sufficient, but I had not realized that page styles still defaulted to the standard ones. Sorry for the unnecessary ticket!
From the introduction of the scrlayer-notecolumn package in chapter ”Note Columns with scrlayer-notecolumn“ in the English KOMA-Script guide: The scrlayer-notecolumn package should solve all these problems. To do so, it relies on the basic functionality of scrlayer. However, using this package has a drawback: you can only output notes on pages that use a page style based on scrlayer. This disadvantage, however, can easily be resolved, or even turned into an advantage, with the help of scrlayer-scrpage....
makenote output on wrong page if scrlayer-scrpage is not loaded
From the introduction of the scrlayer-notecolumn package in chapter ”Note Columns with scrlayer-notecolumn“ in the English KOMA-Script guide: The scrlayer-notecolumn package should solve all these problems. To do so, it relies on the basic functionality of scrlayer. However, using this package has a drawback: you can only output notes on pages that use a page style based on scrlayer. This disadvantage, however, can easily be resolved, or even turned into an advantage, with the help of scrlayer-scrpage....
makenote output on wrong page if scrlayer-scrpage is not loaded
But perhaps I should mention explicitly at this point that I don't actually want to add any more new features to KOMA-Script. At least, not any that I have to write additional guidance for, that I myself have absolutely no need for, that I consider to be of little use, and whose implementation does not represent any personal gain for me. In the end, this new feature took me more time than I had initially anticipated. This means that my plans to continue working on tocbasic have been put on hold again...
Changed again in [r4231] to change the order of the \pagenumbering commands and therefore make egreg's patch suggestion still works with next KOMA-Script release. BTW: I would prefer your suggestion without redefining or patching \frontmatter and \mainmatter. Patches or redefinition always depend somehow on internals. So solutions without are IMHO mostly better.
Changed again in [r4231] to change the order of the \pagenumbering commands and therefore make @egreg's patch suggestion still works with next KOMA-Script release. BTW: I would prefer your suggestion without redefining or patching \frontmatter and \mainmatter. Patches or redefinition always depend somehow on internals. So solutions without are IMHO mostly better.
fix of usage of \ExplSyntaxOn \ExplSyntaxOff
avoid breaking patches of \frontmatter and \mainmatter
Feature request: optional change of page number style after front/main matter
Implemented in [r4229].
optional argument and star variant to \frontmatter, \mainmatter and \backmatter
Feature request: optional change of page number style after front/main matter
HowTo_Template_PDFLaTeX
HowTo_Template_LuaLaTeX_XeLaTeX
HowTo_Template_LuaLaTeX_XeLaTeX
several \@DefineTOCEntry…Option commands reimplemented using \NewDocumentCommand
some of the \@DefineTOCEntry…Option commands reimplemented using \NewDocumentCommand
Tested with the example at TeX.SX and it works like charm.
new feature `dynindent` for ToC entry style `toctext`
Implemented in [r4226].
options dynindent and indentfollows also for style toctext
Ah, ok, in case of using dynindent also for the parent level this is somehow more complicated than I thought after reading your first request. Would it be useful? Yes. Will it be added to KOMA-Script 3.46? I don't know, because there are already several new features in KOMA-Script 3.46 that need to be tested (but AFAIK currently nobody feels responsible to test before the release).
new feature `dynindent` for ToC entry style `toctext`
This is implemented in [r4225], but only the first step. Since the changes are quite extensive, there is of course a risk that something may have been damaged in the process. It would therefore be advantageous if I were not the only one testing this. Testing with l3build is really not that difficult. Simply download the sources, change to the directory containing the sources (and the file build.lua) and call l3build unpack. To use the unpacked version, you only need to set TEXINPUTS accordingly....
Warning_@startsection
Warning_@startsection
using own internal commands instead of redefining kernel commands
new version started
Release 3.49
Release 3.49
I am currently planning to avoid the warnings in the future by no longer using the macros in question (as titlesec also does, for example). At the same time, as long as KOMA-Script classes do not actively support tagging, a meaningful warning with appropriate advice will be issued when tagging is enabled. I may even refer to the standardsectioning package for those who consider tagging more important than the KOMA-Script features for headings. The new warning is already there in [r4223] but not yet...
tagging warning message added
HowTo_PrefixNumberInListOf
HowTo_PrefixNumberInListOf
release 3.48
Releases
Releases
Release 3.47
Release 3.46