[ { "content": "I have a strange problem in compiling Latex documents in Overleaf. Compilation of one main file including several external files works well while compilation of other main files including subsets of those external file produces a large number of errors \"Undefined control sequence\". All files have the same header:\n\n\\documentclass{article}\n\n\\usepackage[margin=1.1in]{geometry}\n\\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}\n\\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}\n\\usepackage{enumitem}\n\\usepackage{hyperref}\n\\usepackage{multirow}\n\\usepackage{booktabs}\n\n\\usepackage{listings}\n\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n basicstyle=\\small\\ttfamily,\n xleftmargin=1em,\n framexleftmargin=0.5em,\n frame=l,\n framerule=0.6pt,\n breaklines=true,\n columns=flexible,\n keepspaces=true,\n aboveskip=0.8em,\n belowskip=0.8em,\n commentstyle=\\color{gray},\n morecomment=[l]{\\#},\n}\n\nThe following text is compiled without problems:\n\\documentclass{article}\n\n\\usepackage[margin=1.1in]{geometry}\n\\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}\n\\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}\n\\usepackage{enumitem}\n\\usepackage{hyperref}\n\\usepackage{multirow}\n\\usepackage{booktabs}\n\n\\usepackage{listings}\n\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n basicstyle=\\small\\ttfamily,\n xleftmargin=1em,\n framexleftmargin=0.5em,\n frame=l,\n framerule=0.6pt,\n breaklines=true,\n columns=flexible,\n keepspaces=true,\n aboveskip=0.8em,\n belowskip=0.8em,\n commentstyle=\\color{gray},\n morecomment=[l]{\\#},\n}\n\n\n\\usepackage{tikz}\n\\usetikzlibrary{shapes.geometric, arrows.meta, positioning, fit, backgrounds, calc}\n\n% Define ATWL standard styles\n\\tikzset{\n artifact/.style={rectangle, draw=black, thick, fill=blue!10, minimum width=2.5cm, minimum height=1cm, text centered, font=\\small},\n transform/.style={ellipse, draw=black, thick, fill=green!10, minimum width=2cm, minimum height=0.8cm, text centered, font=\\small},\n human/.style={artifact, fill=orange!10, line width=1.5pt}, % Bold for human-driven\n loop/.style={draw, dashed, inner sep=0.5cm, label={[anchor=north west]north west:\\textbf{#1}}},\n arrow/.style={-Stealth, thick}\n}\n\n\n\\title{Library of ATWL-represented Visual Analytics Workflows}\n\\author{}\n\\date{}\n\n\\begin{document}\n\\maketitle\nThe document contains following examples of ATWL representations of workflows from published visual analytics papers:\n\\begin{itemize}\n \\item \\ref{ex:cluster-calendar}: Cluster-Calendar \\cite{vanWijkSelow1999}\n \\item \\ref{ex:snapshots-to-points}: Dynamic network analysis \\cite{Elzen2015}\n \\item \\ref{ex:MobilityGraphs}: Graph-based analysis of mass mobility flows \\cite{MobilityGraphs2016}\n \\item \\ref{ex:EventFlow}: EventFlow \\cite{Monroe2013EventFlow}\n \\item \\ref{ex:EventAction}: EventAction \\cite{EventAction2016}\n \\item \\ref{ex:places_from_trajectories}: Extracting significant places from trajectories \\cite{Andrienko_VAST2011}\n \\item \\ref{ex:progressive_clustering}: Progressive clustering of trajectories \\cite{progress_cluster2008}\n \\item \\ref{ex:UTOPIAN}: Human-steered topic modelling \\cite{UTOPIAN2013}\n \\item \\ref{ex:episodes_topics_in_MVTS}: Progressive abstraction of multivariate temporal data \\cite{episodes_topics_MVTS}\n \\item \\ref{ex:PartBased}: Partition-based Regression Modelling \\cite{PartBasedRegression}.\n \\item \\ref{ex:ST_modelling}: Spatio-temporal analysis and modelling through time series fitting \\cite{Andr_2013_STmodelling}.\n \\item \\ref{ex:human-in-loop}: Data engineering for movement pattern classification \\cite{HITL2024}\n \\item \\ref{ex:EMA}: Exploratory Model Analysis \\cite{EMA2019}\n \\item \\ref{ex:bin_class_diag}: Binary Classifier Diagnostics \\cite{BinaryClassDiagnost2017}\n \\item \\ref{ex:RfX}: Interactive exploration of random forest classifier \\cite{RfX2022}\n \\item \\ref{ex:TensorFlow}: Exploring Deep Learning Models in TensorFlow \\cite{TensorFlow}\n \\item \\ref{ex:what-if}: What-If Probing of ML Models \\cite{WhatIf2019}\n\\end{itemize}\nThe diagrammatic representations of the workflow in Section \\ref{sec:diagrams} were automatically generated by a different instance of LLM agent (Claude Opus 4.6R) from the ATWL representations. The encoding used in the diagrams is explained in Fig.\\ref{fig:atwl-legend}.\n\n\n\\bibliographystyle{plain} \n\\bibliography{ref}\n\n\\input{examples/examples}\n\\newpage\n\\input{examples/diagrams}\n\n\\end{document}\n\nThe file examples.tex includes the following:\n\\section{Visual Analytics Workflows Represented in ATWL}\n\\label{app:examples}\n\n\\input{examples/cluster-calendar}\n\\input{examples/snapshots-to-points}\n\\input{examples/MobilityGraphs}\n\\input{examples/EventFlow}\n\\input{examples/EventAction}\n\\input{examples/places_from_trajectories}\n\\input{examples/progressive_clustering}\n\\input{examples/UTOPIAN}\n\\input{examples/episodes+topics_in_MVTS}\n\\input{examples/partition_based_regression}\n\\input{examples/ST_analysis_and_modelling}\n\\input{examples/human-in-the-loop}\n\\input{examples/ExporatoryModelAnalysis}\n\\input{examples/BinClassDiagnostics}\n\\input{examples/RfX}\n\\input{examples/TensorFlow}\n\\input{examples/what-if-tool}\n\nYou see that it does not include any additional packages.\n\nOne of the documents compiled with errors is:\n\n\\documentclass{article}\n\n\\usepackage[margin=1.1in]{geometry}\n\\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}\n\\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}\n\\usepackage{enumitem}\n\\usepackage{hyperref}\n\\usepackage{multirow}\n\\usepackage{booktabs}\n\n\\usepackage{listings}\n\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n basicstyle=\\small\\ttfamily,\n xleftmargin=1em,\n framexleftmargin=0.5em,\n frame=l,\n framerule=0.6pt,\n breaklines=true,\n columns=flexible,\n keepspaces=true,\n aboveskip=0.8em,\n belowskip=0.8em,\n commentstyle=\\color{gray},\n morecomment=[l]{\\#},\n}\n\n\\title{Examples of ATWL Representations of Workflows}\n\\author{}\n\\date{}\n\n\\begin{document}\n\\maketitle\nThe document contains following examples of ATWL representations of workflows from published visual analytics papers:\n\\begin{itemize}\n \\item \\ref{ex:cluster-calendar}: Cluster-Calendar. Shows the fundamental iterative refinement pattern in its simplest form.\n \\item \\ref{ex:EventFlow}: EventFlow. Shows that \\texttt{then} branches can contain multi-step sub-workflows; demonstrates when to omit embedment; shows entities as single structured objects.\n \\item \\ref{ex:human-in-loop}: Data engineering for movement pattern classification. Shows \\texttt{build-model} and model validation; demonstrates that \\texttt{characterise} (not \\texttt{define-unit}) is correct for applying existing models; two loops with different analytical logic.\n \\item \\ref{ex:progressive_clustering}: Progressive clustering of trajectories. Shows pre-loop assignment; demonstrates both termination patterns in one workflow; illustrates progressive analytical reasoning across phases.\n\\end{itemize}\n\n\\input{examples/cluster-calendar}\n\\input{examples/EventFlow}\n\\input{examples/human-in-the-loop}\n\\input{examples/progressive_clustering}\n\n\\end{document}\n\nAn example of lines producing errors:\n# ============================================================================\n# INPUT: Complete movement trajectory dataset\n# ============================================================================\n\nContext:\n\\subsection*{ATWL representation}\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl, basicstyle=\\footnotesize\\ttfamily]\nworkflow progressive-trajectory-clustering\n template: loop(define-unit (destinations) -> visualise -> assess) -> \n define-unit (select major) ->\n loop(define-unit (routes: subset) -> visualise -> assess) -> \n define-unit (verification) -> visualise -> assess ->\n define-unit (exclude) -> define-unit (routes: final) -> visualise ->\n abstract (route types) -> abstract (synthesize) -> generate-knowledge\n description: \"Iteratively cluster trajectories through sequence of analytical \n questions, progressively refining understanding of movement patterns\"\n\n# ============================================================================\n# INPUT: Complete movement trajectory dataset\n# ============================================================================\n...\n...\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\nThe same lines are compiled without problems when the file containing them is included in another main file.\n\nWhat is the problem and how to solve it?\n", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user is having a problem where the same included files compile fine in one main document but produce \"Undefined control sequence\" errors in another main document. \n\nLooking at the two main files, I can see a key difference:\n\nThe **working** main file includes:\n```latex\n\\usepackage{tikz}\n\\usetikzlibrary{shapes.geometric, arrows.meta, positioning, fit, backgrounds, calc}\n```\n\nThe **failing** main file does **not** include `\\usepackage{tikz}`.\n\nNow, the error is \"Undefined control sequence\" and the problematic line contains `\\color{gray}` in the `lstdefinestyle`. \n\n\nThe `\\color` command comes from the `color` or `xcolor` package, and `tikz` automatically loads `xcolor` as a dependency. Without `tikz` present, the `\\color{gray}` command in the `lstdefinestyle` is undefined. The fix is to add `\\usepackage{xcolor}` to the failing document's preamble, since that's what the working document gets implicitly through `tikz`.\n\n## The Problem\n\nYour **working** main file loads `\\usepackage{tikz}`, which internally loads the `xcolor` package. Your **failing** main file does **not** load `tikz` (or any color package).\n\nIn your `lstdefinestyle`, you use:\n\n```latex\ncommentstyle=\\color{gray},\n```\n\nThe `\\color` command is **not** defined by the `listings` package itself — it requires `xcolor` (or `color`). In the working document, `tikz` pulls in `xcolor` as a dependency, so `\\color{gray}` works. In the other document, no color package is loaded, so `\\color` is an undefined control sequence.\n\n## The Fix\n\nAdd `\\usepackage{xcolor}` to the preamble of the failing document (before `\\usepackage{listings}`):\n\n```latex\n\\usepackage{xcolor} % <-- add this line\n\\usepackage{listings}\n```\n\nAlternatively, if you want all your documents to share exactly the same header, just always include `\\usepackage{xcolor}` in the common header — it's a lightweight package and won't conflict with `tikz` if loaded later.", "role": "assistant" }, { "content": "Now I would like to modify the atwl style so that it includes syntax highlighting. Is this possible? If so, I can provide you a description of the ATWL syntax, so that you suggest me how to highlight different syntax elements.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user wants to add syntax highlighting to their `lstdefinestyle{atwl}` style for a custom language called ATWL. The `listings` package supports defining custom languages with keywords, comments, strings, and other elements that can be highlighted with different styles.\n\nYes, this is absolutely possible with the `listings` package. You can use `\\lstdefinelanguage` to define a custom language with keywords, comments, string delimiters, etc., and then apply color styles to each category.\n\nI should tell them yes and ask them to provide the ATWL syntax description.\n\nYes, this is absolutely possible! The `listings` package supports defining custom languages via `\\lstdefinelanguage`, where you can specify:\n\n- **Keywords** (multiple classes/groups, each with its own style)\n- **Comment delimiters** (line comments, block comments)\n- **String delimiters**\n- **\"Emph\" words** (additional highlighted word groups)\n- **Directives / special identifiers**\n- **Sensitive vs. case-insensitive matching**\n\nYou can assign distinct colors/fonts to each category (e.g., keywords in bold blue, operations in teal, comments in gray, strings in red, etc.).\n\nPlease provide me with the ATWL syntax description — ideally covering:\n\n1. **Keywords/reserved words** (e.g., `workflow`, `loop`, `template`, etc.)\n2. **Operations/commands** (e.g., `define-unit`, `visualise`, `assess`, `abstract`, etc.)\n3. **Comment syntax** (looks like `#` for line comments?)\n4. **String delimiters** (looks like `\"...\"`?)\n5. **Any other syntactic categories** you'd like distinguished (e.g., parameters, annotations, operators like `->`)\n\nWith that, I can write you a complete `\\lstdefinelanguage{ATWL}` and an updated style definition.", "role": "assistant" }, { "content": "\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n basicstyle=\\small\\ttfamily,\n xleftmargin=1em,\n framexleftmargin=0.5em,\n frame=l,\n framerule=0.6pt,\n breaklines=true,\n columns=flexible,\n keepspaces=true,\n aboveskip=0.8em,\n belowskip=0.8em,\n commentstyle=\\color{gray},\n morecomment=[l]{\\#},\n}\n\n\\newcommand{\\kw}[1]{\\texttt{#1}}\n\\newcommand{\\meta}[1]{\\textit{$\\langle$#1$\\rangle$}}\n\n\\section{ATWL Syntax Reference}\n\\label{sec:atwl-syntax-reference}\n\nThis section provides a concise syntax reference for the\n\\textbf{Artifact--Transform Workflow Language (ATWL)},\na declarative language for representing visual analytics workflows\nas structured transformations of artifacts.\nAngle brackets (\\texttt{<\\,>}) denote placeholders;\nthe \\texttt{\\#} character introduces comments.\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\subsection{Workflow Declaration}\n\\label{sec:syn-workflow}\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nworkflow \n template: -> -> ... # optional\n description: \"\" # optional\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\texttt{template} summarises the main analytic stages using the\n same intent vocabulary as transforms (Section~\\ref{sec:syn-intents}).\n Parenthetical qualifiers (e.g.\\ \\texttt{(similarity-based)})\n are informal annotations, not new intents.\n \\item Iteration may be indicated with\n \\texttt{loop( -> -> ...)}.\n Loop notation in templates is optional and used only when the iterative\n structure is a key characteristic of the analytical method.\n \\item Artifacts and transforms may be declared in any order that aids\n readability.\n\\end{itemize}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\subsection{Artifacts}\n\\label{sec:syn-artifacts}\n\nATWL defines eight artifact types.\nEvery artifact is declared with a unique identifier and its type.\nThe field \\texttt{origin: given} marks \\emph{exogenous} artifacts not\nproduced by any transform in the workflow; it is omitted for artifacts\nthat appear as transform outputs.\nArtifact type declarations may include references to other artifacts in\nparentheses, e.g.\\ \\texttt{feature(D1)}.\n\n% -- entities --\n\\subsubsection{Entities}\n\\label{sec:syn-entities}\n\nA collection of identifiable analytical objects of the same kind, each\ntreated as a single (possibly structured) piece of data for the purposes\nof analysis.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : entities\n origin: given # only for exogenous artifacts\n internal structure: \n embedment: # omitted for single entity\n features:\n - id: \n\n value structure: \n value type: # optional\n description: \"\"\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\paragraph{Internal structure.}\nDescribes how components inside each entity are organised.\n\n\\begin{table}[ht]\\centering\\footnotesize\n\\begin{tabularx}{\\columnwidth}{@{}l >{\\raggedright\\arraybackslash}X l @{}}\n\\toprule\n\\textbf{Type} & \\textbf{Description} & \\textbf{Category} \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\texttt{elementary} & Indivisible unit in workflow & Atomic \\\\\n\\texttt{group/cluster} & Unordered collection & Container \\\\\n\\texttt{episode} & Bounded time interval; temporal units & Container \\\\\n\\texttt{region} & Bounded spatial extent; spatial units & Container \\\\\n\\texttt{sequence} & Components in linear order & Relational \\\\\n\\texttt{formation} & General relational structure (network) & Relational \\\\\n\\bottomrule\n\\end{tabularx}\n\\caption{Types of internal structure for entities.}\n\\label{tab:internal-structure}\n\\end{table}\n\n\\paragraph{Embedment.}\nDescribes the shared environment(s) in which the entities reside and how\nthey are related to each other. Omitted when the artifact represents a\nsingle entity. Values may be single or combined in set notation\n(e.g.\\ \\texttt{\\{set, time\\}}).\n\n\\begin{table}[ht]\\centering\\footnotesize\n\\begin{tabularx}{\\columnwidth}{@{}l >{\\raggedright\\arraybackslash}X @{}}\n\\toprule\n\\textbf{Embedment} & \\textbf{Description} \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\texttt{set} & Unordered collection \\\\\n\\texttt{sequence} & Ordered positions (no metric) \\\\\n\\texttt{time} & Temporal axis (abs./rel.) \\\\\n\\texttt{space} & Spatial reference (coords/geom) \\\\\n\\texttt{relational} & Network or hierarchical structure \\\\\n\\bottomrule\n\\end{tabularx}\n\\caption{Embedment types for entities.}\n\\vspace{3mm}\n\\label{tab:embedment}\n\\end{table}\n\n\\paragraph{Features (inside entities).}\nEach feature declares a \\textbf{value structure} and, optionally, a\n\\textbf{value type}. The same scheme applies to standalone feature\nartifacts (Section~\\ref{sec:syn-feature}).\n\n\\begin{table}[ht]\\centering\\footnotesize\n\\begin{tabularx}{\\columnwidth}{@{}l >{\\raggedright\\arraybackslash}X @{}}\n\\toprule\n\\multicolumn{2}{@{}l}{\\textbf{Value structure} --- overall organisation} \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\texttt{atomic} & Single value per entity \\\\\n\\texttt{list} & Enumeration of values \\\\\n\\texttt{vector} & Fixed-length array \\\\\n\\texttt{matrix} & 2D array of values \\\\\n\\texttt{relational} & Irregular structure (graph/tree) \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\multicolumn{2}{@{}l}{\\textbf{Value type} (optional) --- atomic components} \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\texttt{numeric} & Quantitative counts/measures \\\\\n\\texttt{ordinal} & Ordered values, no metric \\\\\n\\texttt{categorical} & Unordered discrete categories \\\\\n\\texttt{temporal} & Time points or durations \\\\\n\\texttt{spatial} & Coordinates or geometries \\\\\n\\texttt{text} & Textual content \\\\\n\\texttt{reference} & ID pointing to other artifacts \\\\\n\\bottomrule\n\\end{tabularx}\n\\caption{Value structure and value type for features.}\n\\label{tab:value-structure}\n\\end{table}\n\nWhen atomic components are of mixed types, set notation is used\n(e.g.\\ \\texttt{\\{numeric, temporal\\}}). The value type may be omitted\nwhen the mixture is complex or the types are evident from context.\n\n% -- feature --\n\\subsubsection{Feature}\n\\label{sec:syn-feature}\n\nExplicit descriptors of properties of entities or relationships between\nthem. Typically produced by \\texttt{characterise} transforms.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : feature()\n value structure: \n value type: # optional\n representation form: \"\" # optional\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\texttt{} refers to the artifact described by the feature.\n\\texttt{representation form} clarifies encoding for complex features\n(e.g.\\ \\texttt{\"similarity matrix\"}, \\texttt{\"k-NN graph\"}).\n\n% -- arrangement --\n\\subsubsection{Arrangement}\n\\label{sec:syn-arrangement}\n\nAn arrangement organises entities in a context, defining how they are\npositioned within a reference structure. It does not create new entities\nor values.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : arrangement()\n context: \n principle: \"\"\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\texttt{}: the entities whose members are arranged.\n \\item \\texttt{context}: an entities artifact acting as the reference\n structure (e.g.\\ calendar days, map regions, a projection layout).\n \\item \\texttt{principle}: how positions are determined (e.g.\\\n \\texttt{\"calendar(year, month, weekday)\"},\n \\texttt{\"2D projection based on similarity\"}).\n\\end{itemize}\n\n% -- visualisation --\n\\subsubsection{Visualisation}\n\\label{sec:syn-visualisation}\n\nAn external visual representation for human perception.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : visualisation()\n layout: \"\"\n form: \"\"\n encoding: \"\" # optional but recommended\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\texttt{}: one or more artifacts of any type.\n \\item \\texttt{layout}: structure of the visual space\n (e.g.\\ \\texttt{\"calendar grid\"}, \\texttt{\"2D projection\"}).\n \\item \\texttt{form}: visual mark type\n (e.g.\\ \\texttt{\"coloured marks\"}, \\texttt{\"node-link diagram\"}).\n \\item \\texttt{encoding}: how features and arrangements map to\n visual attributes.\n\\end{itemize}\n\n% -- pattern --\n\\subsubsection{Pattern}\n\\label{sec:syn-pattern}\n\nAn abstract regularity or structure identified in data, features,\narrangements, visualisations, or models.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : pattern()\n representation form: \"\"\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\texttt{representation form} describes how the pattern is represented\n(e.g.\\ \\texttt{\"textual descriptions\"}, \\texttt{\"ranked list of motifs\"},\n\\texttt{\"rules\"}).\n\n% -- model --\n\\subsubsection{Model}\n\\label{sec:syn-model}\n\nA formal or computational representation used for prediction, simulation,\nor explanation.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : model()\n model type: \"\"\n representation form: \"\" # optional\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\texttt{model type}: high-level category\n (e.g.\\ \\texttt{\"classifier\"}, \\texttt{\"topic model\"},\n \\texttt{\"simulation model\"}).\n \\item \\texttt{representation form}: internal parametric or structural form\n (e.g.\\ \\texttt{\"decision tree\"}, \\texttt{\"neural network weights\"}).\n\\end{itemize}\n\n% -- knowledge --\n\\subsubsection{Knowledge}\n\\label{sec:syn-knowledge}\n\nExplicitly formulated knowledge, either \\emph{derived} in the analysis\n(insights, explanations, rules) or \\emph{injected} during the analysis\n(domain expertise, constraints, feedback).\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : knowledge()\n origin: given # for injected; omitted for derived\n representation form: \"\"\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\texttt{} reference the artifacts this knowledge is based on or\napplies to.\n\\texttt{representation form} examples: \\texttt{\"statements\"},\n\\texttt{\"if-then rules\"}, \\texttt{\"labels\"}, \\texttt{\"quality judgment\"}.\n\nNote: \\texttt{assess} transforms produce \\emph{evaluative} knowledge\n(quality judgments, adequacy decisions), while \\texttt{generate-knowledge}\ntransforms produce \\emph{substantive} knowledge (domain insights,\nconclusions).\n\n% -- specification --\n\\subsubsection{Specification}\n\\label{sec:syn-specification}\n\nAn explicit description of parameters, settings, constraints, or method\nchoices that determine how transforms are executed.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nartifact : specification\n origin: given # for injected; omitted for derived\n representation form: \"\"\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\texttt{representation form} examples:\n\\texttt{\"parameter settings\"},\n\\texttt{\"method choice\"},\n\\texttt{\"constraints\"},\n\\texttt{\"configuration schema\"}.\n\nSpecifications are typically consumed by transforms whose behaviour\ndepends on configurable choices. They may be given (exogenous) or\nderived---most commonly by \\texttt{generate-knowledge} or \\texttt{assess}\ntransforms.\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\subsection{Transforms}\n\\label{sec:syn-transforms}\n\nEach transform consumes one or more input artifacts and produces one or\nmore output artifacts.\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\ntransform :\n intent: \n manner: \"\" # optional specialisation\n input: \n output: \n actor: human | machine | hybrid\n description: \"\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\texttt{intent}: one of the generic intents in\n Table~\\ref{app:tab:intents}.\n \\item \\texttt{manner}: optional free-text specialisation of intent\n (see Table~\\ref{tab:manner}).\n \\item \\texttt{input}/\\texttt{output}: comma-separated artifact IDs.\n \\item \\texttt{actor}:\n \\texttt{human} (analyst only),\n \\texttt{machine} (computation only), or\n \\texttt{hybrid} (human--machine collaboration).\n\\end{itemize}\n\n\\subsubsection{Generic Intents}\n\\label{sec:syn-intents}\n\n\\begin{table}[ht]\\centering\\footnotesize\n\\begin{tabularx}{\\columnwidth}{@{}l >{\\raggedright\\arraybackslash}X >{\\raggedright\\arraybackslash}p{2.2cm} @{}}\n\\toprule\n\\textbf{Intent} & \\textbf{Purpose} & \\textbf{Typical outputs} \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\texttt{define-unit} & Create/redefine units (extract, group, aggregate) & entities (+ feature) \\\\\n\\texttt{characterise} & Compute/transform features & feature \\\\\n\\texttt{contextualise} & Place entities in context & arrangement \\\\\n\\texttt{visualise} & Create visual reps. & visualisation \\\\\n\\texttt{abstract} & Derive patterns/structures & pattern (+ feature) \\\\\n\\texttt{build-model} & Construct/refine models & model \\\\\n\\texttt{gen-knowledge} & Formulate knowledge & knowl./spec. \\\\\n\\texttt{assess} & Evaluate quality/adequacy & knowl. (+ spec.) \\\\\n\\bottomrule\n\\end{tabularx}\n\\caption{Generic transform intents.}\n\\label{app:tab:intents}\n\\end{table}\n\n\\subsubsection{Specialisations via Manner}\n\\label{sec:syn-manner}\n\nThe \\texttt{manner} field is not part of the core type system but is\nrecommended for consistency and tool interoperability.\nTable~\\ref{tab:manner} gives illustrative (extensible) values.\n\n\\begin{table}[ht]\\centering\\footnotesize\n\\begin{tabularx}{\\columnwidth}{@{}l >{\\raggedright\\arraybackslash}X @{}}\n\\toprule\n\\textbf{Intent} & \\textbf{Example manner values} \\\\\n\\midrule\n\\texttt{define-unit} & extract, filter, partitioning, cluster, group, merge \\\\\n\\texttt{characterise} & summarise, aggregate, profile, project, encode, relate \\\\\n\\texttt{contextualise} & calendar-, map-, or projection-based; time-alignment \\\\\n\\texttt{visualise} & line-graph, coloured-marks, node-link, matrix-plot \\\\\n\\texttt{abstract} & pattern-mining, salient-groups, interpretation \\\\\n\\texttt{build-model} & train-classifier, fit-topic-model, calibrate \\\\\n\\texttt{gen-knowledge} & formulate-statements, derive-rules, write-summary \\\\\n\\texttt{assess} & evaluate-quality, assess-performance, judge-adequacy \\\\\n\\bottomrule\n\\end{tabularx}\n\\caption{Illustrative \\texttt{manner} values by intent.}\n\\label{tab:manner}\n\\end{table}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\subsection{Control Structures}\n\\label{sec:syn-control}\n\nControl structures describe analytic logic, not executable control.\n\n\\subsubsection{Loop}\n\\label{sec:syn-loop}\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nloop :\n purpose: \"\"\n until: \"\"\n body:\n \nend loop \n\\end{lstlisting}\n\nThe \\texttt{until} field states a qualitative stopping condition.\nTwo styles of termination are supported:\n\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\textbf{Explicit assessment.} The loop body contains an\n \\texttt{assess} transform followed by a conditional with\n \\texttt{exit loop } in one branch.\n \\item \\textbf{Implicit termination.} No explicit assessment or\n conditional exit appears; the \\texttt{until} condition is\n monitored informally by the analyst.\n\\end{itemize}\n\n\\subsubsection{Conditional}\n\\label{sec:syn-conditional}\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nif :\n then:\n \n else:\n \n\\end{lstlisting}\n\nConditions refer to artifact properties or human judgements.\nUse \\texttt{exit loop } in a branch to leave an enclosing loop.\n\n\\subsubsection{Assignment}\n\\label{sec:syn-assignment}\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl]\nassign:\n := \n := \n\\end{lstlisting}\n\nAssignments bind an artifact identifier to a new version.\nThey appear in two contexts:\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item \\textbf{Before a loop}, to initialise an identifier that will be\n reassigned during iteration.\n \\item \\textbf{Inside a loop body}, to express iterative update of an\n artifact.\n\\end{itemize}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\subsection{Workflow Validity and Conventions}\n\\label{sec:syn-validity}\n\nA well-formed ATWL workflow should satisfy:\n\\begin{enumerate}[nosep]\n \\item All artifact identifiers are unique within the workflow.\n \\item Every transform input references a declared artifact.\n \\item Artifacts with \\texttt{origin: given} are never transform outputs.\n \\item The artifact dependency graph is acyclic (except for explicit\n \\texttt{assign} statements in loops).\n\\end{enumerate}\n\n\\noindent Additional conventions:\n\\begin{itemize}[nosep]\n \\item Exogenous artifacts (\\texttt{origin: given}) are typically\n declared near the top or near their first use.\n \\item Lists of artifact IDs are comma-separated.\n \\item Artifact references appear in parentheses after the type keyword,\n e.g.\\ \\texttt{feature(D1)}, \\texttt{arrangement(D\\_events)}.\n \\item Each transform carries exactly one \\texttt{intent}, even when\n it produces multiple artifact types; the intent reflects the\n primary analytic purpose.\n\\end{itemize}\n\nDefine the keyword categories and propose styles for each category.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user wants me to define a custom language for the `listings` package that provides syntax highlighting for ATWL (Artifact-Transform Workflow Language). Based on the syntax reference they provided, I need to identify the keyword categories and propose appropriate styles.\n\nLet me analyze the ATWL syntax and identify distinct categories:\n\n**1. Top-level declarations / Structure keywords:**\n- `workflow`, `artifact`, `transform`, `loop`, `end loop`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `assign`\n\n**2. Artifact types:**\n- `entities`, `feature`, `arrangement`, `visualisation`, `pattern`, `model`, `knowledge`, `specification`\n\n\n**3. Transform intents:**\n- `define-unit`, `characterise`, `contextualise`, `visualise`, `abstract`, `build-model`, `gen-knowledge`, `generate-knowledge`, `assess`\n\n**4. Field names / Properties:**\n- `template`, `description`, `origin`, `internal structure`, `embedment`, `features`, `id`, `value structure`, `value type`, `representation form`, `intent`, `manner`, `input`, `output`, `actor`, `purpose`, `until`, `body`, `layout`, `form`, `encoding`, `context`, `principle`, `model type`\n\n**5. Property values (enumerated):**\n- `given`\n- Actor: `human`, `machine`, `hybrid`\n- Internal structure: `elementary`, `group/cluster`, `episode`, `region`, `sequence`, `formation`\n- Embedment: `set`, `sequence`, `time`, `space`, `relational`\n- Value structure: `atomic`, `list`, `vector`, `matrix`, `relational`\n- Value type: `numeric`, `ordinal`, `categorical`, `temporal`, `spatial`, `text`, `reference`\n\n**6. Control flow keywords:**\n- `loop`, `end loop`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit loop`, `assign`\n\n**7. Operators:**\n- `->`, `:=`, `:`\n\n**8. Comments:**\n- `#` line comments\n\n**9. Strings:**\n- `\"...\"` quoted text\n\nNow I'm considering the limitations of the `listings` package for this syntax highlighting task.\n\nThe package can handle up to about 16 keyword classes, but multi-word keywords like `end loop` and `internal structure` are problematic since `listings` doesn't natively support them. I could use the `literate` feature for special cases or `moredelim` to work around this. Keywords with hyphens should work fine by setting `alsoletter={-}` to treat hyphens as part of identifiers.\n\nFor multi-word keywords, I'm thinking the most practical approach would be using `literate` for operators like `->` and potentially handling multi-word field names through a different mechanism rather than trying to force them into the keyword system.\n\nLooking at the ATWL examples more carefully, field names appear at line starts followed by colons, which gives me a different angle. I'm settling on a practical grouping: structure and declaration keywords like `workflow`, `artifact`, `transform`, `loop`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `end` in bold dark blue; artifact types like `entities`, `feature`, `arrangement`, `visualisation`, `pattern`, `model`, `knowledge`, `specification` in bold teal; and transform intents starting with `define-unit`...\n\nThe real challenge is multi-word field names like `internal structure`, `value structure`, `value type`, `representation form`, `model type`, `exit loop` — the listings package struggles with spaces in keywords. I'm exploring whether `literate` mode could replace these sequences with formatted versions, though that approach has its own limitations.\n\nLooking at the actual code structure, descriptions are quoted strings so they're handled separately, and field names appear in predictable positions. I think the practical solution is to just include the distinctive individual words from multi-word terms and let the context prevent false positives. Let me refine the keyword groups with this in mind. a keyword, it might get highlighted in descriptions too, but since descriptions are in strings, they'd be handled by the string style instead. That works well. But field names like `value structure:` and `value type:` appear outside strings, so if I add `value`, `structure`, and `type` individually, they'd get highlighted wherever they appear outside strings — including in comments where they might not be field names. I need to think through which multi-word fields to highlight separately: `internal structure`, `value structure`, `value type`, and `representation form` could each have their components highlighted, though `model type` is tricky since `model` is already an artifact type.\n\nActually, words like `internal`, `structure`, `value`, `type`, `representation`, `form`, `exit`, and `end` are unlikely to appear outside their intended context in ATWL code except in strings or comments, which get styled differently anyway. Some overlap is inevitable — `form` appears both as a field name and in `representation form:`, and `model` is both an artifact type and part of `model type:` — but that's fine since they're semantically related. I'm starting to organize the keywords into groups, with declaration and control keywords getting bold dark blue styling. I'm realizing that field values like `atomic`, `spatial`, and `list` should probably get their own syntax highlighting category since they appear consistently after colons in the ATWL structure. Let me think through whether `type` is too generic or if it works fine as a field name given how it's actually used in the code examples. visualise` as an intent versus `visualisation` as an artifact type keeps them distinct with different colors. Now I'm organizing the final groupings: declaration and control keywords in bold dark blue, artifact types in bold teal, and transform intents starting with `define-unit`\n\n—continuing through `characterise`, `contextualise`, `visualise`, `abstract`, `build-model`, and related terms in bold purple. Field and property names like `template`, `description`, `origin`, `intent`, and many others would use dark orange-brown styling. Though I'm second-guessing whether coloring frequently-used terms like `description` and short ones like `id` will create too much visual noise.\n\nI'm realizing `intent` creates a conflict since it functions both as a field name in transform declarations and relates semantically to intent values, but I'll keep it grouped with field names since that's its primary context. Similarly, `model` appears in multiple roles—as an artifact type and within compound field names—so I'm prioritizing its artifact type classification, letting `model type:` display with mixed highlighting. The same consideration applies to `form` as a visualization field name.\n\nNow I'm working through `structure`, `sequence`, and `set`—these appear as both field name components and as values in embedment contexts. `Sequence` specifically shows up after colons in contexts like embedment declarations, so it belongs in the values group. I'm also reconsidering whether `time` and `space` are too generic, since they might appear in unintended places beyond their ATWL-specific uses in embedment declarations.\n\nLet me refine Group 5 to focus on the most distinctive enumerated values that won't trigger false highlights—keeping terms like `given`, `human`, `machine`, `hybrid`, `elementary`, `episode`, `region`, `formation`, `atomic`, `vector`, `matrix`, `numeric`, `ordinal`, `categorical`, `temporal`, `spatial`, and `relational`. I'll drop the more ambiguous ones like `set`, `time`, `space`, `sequence`, `list`, and `text` to avoid highlighting them in contexts where they're just regular language.\n\nNow I'm setting up styling for the `->` operator using the literate property... Defining color palette for ATWL syntax highlighting... Defining more keyword groups...\n\nI'm noticing there's a potential issue with `sequence` appearing in the enumerated values, and I need to check if it conflicts with other definitions in the language specification.\n\nLooking at the field names and intent values, I see that `intent` is correctly placed as a field name while the actual intent values like `define-unit` are separate. The word `abstract` should only appear in strings, so that's not a problem. But I'm concerned about `type` being in the fields group when it also appears in compound terms like `value type:` — I need to verify how that distinction works in the syntax.\n\nI'm also noticing that `visualise` as an intent in the template is different from `visualisation` as an artifact type, so those don't conflict. Now I'm checking whether `input` and `output` create any similar issues with their placement. one group definition overrides another if there's overlap. Let me verify that each keyword appears in only one group to avoid conflicts — checking through `set`, `sequence`, `model`, `form`, `abstract`, `visualise`, `space`, `time`, `type`, `structure`, `pattern`, and a few others to make sure nothing's duplicated across groups.\n\nNow I'm thinking about the `then` keyword in conditionals and `body` in loop declarations — those seem fine since they only appear in their specific contexts within ATWL syntax. But I'm running into a potential issue with the hyphen character in the `alsoletter` definition, which might cause problems depending on how it's escaped. So the tokenizer would split `-` as its own identifier token, followed by `>` as a separate character. But using `literate` to replace `->` before tokenization happens would bypass this whole issue, since the replacement occurs at an earlier stage than keyword matching. ) and ` visualise` (after). Since `define-unit` doesn't contain `->`, it wouldn't be affected. The `literate` replacements happen during output and interact with keyword detection separately. Using `literate` with `->` should work fine alongside `alsoletter={-}` because `define-unit` has `e-u` not `->`, and the `->` operator always appears surrounded by spaces in ATWL anyway.\n\nI'm considering adding literate replacements for the operators to color them properly, though I need to be careful about how this interacts with strings — if `->` appears inside a string like `description: \"step1 -> step2\"`, the replacement would still apply, but the string styling would color the whole thing anyway. Handling the `end loop` and `exit loop` constructs works well since both keywords fall into the same group and get highlighted together. I'm thinking through whether to stick with the `listings` style approach or define a separate language with `\\lstdefinelanguage` — the latter feels cleaner for organization. There's also the question of how to handle field names followed by colons, which is a specific ATWL syntax pattern I need to account for. Looking at the ATWL examples, `value` only appears as part of field names like `value structure` and `value type`, while free text lives in strings that get their own styling. Comments would also override any keyword highlighting. The word boundary detection in `listings` means short words like `end` won't accidentally match inside longer words like `endpoint`. I'm satisfied the highlighting scheme is solid.\n\n## Proposed ATWL Keyword Categories and Styles\n\nBased on your syntax reference, I identify **6 categories** (plus comments and strings):\n\n| Category | Examples | Proposed Style |\n|----------|----------|----------------|\n| **1. Declarations & Control** | `workflow`, `artifact`, `transform`, `loop`, `end`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit` | **Bold, dark blue** |\n| **2. Artifact Types** | `entities`, `feature`, `arrangement`, `visualisation`, `pattern`, `model`, `knowledge`, `specification` | **Bold, teal** |\n| **3. Transform Intents** | `define-unit`, `characterise`, `contextualise`, `visualise`, `abstract`, `build-model`, `gen-knowledge`, `generate-knowledge`, `assess` | **Bold, purple** |\n| **4. Field Names** | `template`, `description`, `origin`, `intent`, `manner`, `input`, `output`, `actor`, `purpose`, `until`, `body`, `features`, `id`, `layout`, `form`, `encoding`, `context`, `principle`, `embedment`, `internal`, `structure`, `value`, `type`, `representation` | **Dark orange (no bold)** |\n| **5. Enumerated Values** | `given`, `human`, `machine`, `hybrid`, `elementary`, `episode`, `region`, `formation`, `atomic`, `vector`, `matrix`, `numeric`, `ordinal`, `categorical`, `temporal`, `spatial`, `relational`, `set`, `time`, `space`, `sequence`, `list`, `reference` | **Dark green** |\n| **6. Operators** | `->`, `:=` | **Red** |\n| **Comments** | `# ...` | *Gray italic* |\n| **Strings** | `\"...\"` | **Dark red** |\n\n## Complete LaTeX Code\n\n```latex\n\\usepackage{xcolor}\n\\usepackage{listings}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n% ATWL syntax highlighting colours\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\definecolor{atwl-keyword}{RGB}{0,0,160} % Dark blue\n\\definecolor{atwl-type}{RGB}{0,120,120} % Teal\n\\definecolor{atwl-intent}{RGB}{128,0,128} % Purple\n\\definecolor{atwl-field}{RGB}{170,85,0} % Dark orange\n\\definecolor{atwl-value}{RGB}{0,110,0} % Dark green\n\\definecolor{atwl-string}{RGB}{163,21,21} % Dark red\n\\definecolor{atwl-comment}{RGB}{106,115,125} % Gray\n\\definecolor{atwl-operator}{RGB}{192,0,0} % Red\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n% Language definition\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\lstdefinelanguage{ATWL}{\n alsoletter={-}, % allow hyphens in identifiers\n sensitive=true,\n % Group 1: Declarations and control flow\n morekeywords=[1]{workflow,artifact,transform,loop,end,assign,if,then,else,exit},\n % Group 2: Artifact types\n morekeywords=[2]{entities,feature,arrangement,visualisation,pattern,model,knowledge,specification},\n % Group 3: Transform intents\n morekeywords=[3]{define-unit,characterise,contextualise,visualise,abstract,build-model,gen-knowledge,generate-knowledge,assess},\n % Group 4: Field / property names\n morekeywords=[4]{template,description,origin,intent,manner,input,output,actor,purpose,until,body,features,id,layout,form,encoding,context,principle,embedment,internal,structure,value,type,representation},\n % Group 5: Enumerated values\n morekeywords=[5]{given,human,machine,hybrid,elementary,episode,region,formation,atomic,vector,matrix,numeric,ordinal,categorical,temporal,spatial,relational,set,time,space,sequence,list,reference},\n % Comments and strings\n morecomment=[l]{\\#},\n morestring=[b]\",\n}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n% Style definition\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n language=ATWL,\n basicstyle=\\small\\ttfamily,\n xleftmargin=1em,\n framexleftmargin=0.5em,\n frame=l,\n framerule=0.6pt,\n breaklines=true,\n columns=flexible,\n keepspaces=true,\n aboveskip=0.8em,\n belowskip=0.8em,\n % Keyword styles by group\n keywordstyle=[1]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-keyword}, % declarations/control\n keywordstyle=[2]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-type}, % artifact types\n keywordstyle=[3]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-intent}, % transform intents\n keywordstyle=[4]\\color{atwl-field}, % field names (no bold)\n keywordstyle=[5]\\color{atwl-value}, % enumerated values\n % Comments, strings, operators\n commentstyle=\\itshape\\color{atwl-comment},\n stringstyle=\\color{atwl-string},\n % Operator highlighting via literate\n literate={->}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{->}}}2\n {:=}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{:=}}}2,\n}\n```\n\n## Notes\n\n1. **No conflicts with strings/comments:** When `value`, `description`, etc. appear inside `\"...\"` or after `#`, the string/comment style takes precedence over keyword styling.\n\n2. **Hyphenated keywords** (`define-unit`, `build-model`, `gen-knowledge`) work thanks to `alsoletter={-}`.\n\n3. **Multi-word field names** (e.g., `value structure`, `internal structure`): each word is highlighted individually in the same field-name color, so they appear visually unified.\n\n4. **The `literate` for `->` and `:=`** is optional — remove it if it causes any issues with line breaking or spacing. An alternative is to leave operators unstyled.\n\n5. **Don't forget** `\\usepackage{xcolor}` before `\\usepackage{listings}` (the fix from your earlier problem).\n\nWould you like me to adjust any colors, move words between categories, or add/remove keywords?", "role": "assistant" }, { "content": "Some notes:\n1) \"artifact\" and \"transform\" are the most important keywords that should have the highest prominence; the language is called Artifact-Transform Workflow Language\n2) \"gen-knowledge\" is a mistake; there is no such intent type in the language definition\n3) \"human\", \"machine\", \"hybrid\" make a special category: actors\n4) enumerated values other than actors are not key elements of the syntax\n5) strings (free text) should not be too prominent; those are arbitrary texts\n\nI also include an example of a full workflow representation:\n\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl, basicstyle=\\footnotesize\\ttfamily]\nworkflow ST_analysis_modelling\n\ntemplate: define-unit (prepare) ->\n loop(define-unit (group) -> visualise (grouping) -> assess (grouping) ->\n abstract (temporal) -> characterise (representative) ->\n generate-knowledge (configure) -> build-model ->\n visualise (model) -> assess (fit) ->\n characterise (residuals) -> visualise (residuals) -> assess (residuals) ->\n generate-knowledge (refinement)) ->\n generate-knowledge (externalize)\n\ndescription: \"Visual analytics framework for analysis and modelling of\n spatio-temporal data: combines interactive clustering with statistical\n time series modelling to build externally storable, reusable\n spatio-temporal models\"\n\n# ============================================================================\n\n# INPUT\n\n# ============================================================================\n\nartifact D_raw : entities\n origin: given\n internal structure: elementary\n embedment: {set, time, space}\n features:\n - id: measurements\n value structure: vector\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Attribute values (e.g., call duration) with\n associated spatial coordinates and time stamps\"\n description: \"Raw spatio-temporal data records to be aggregated into\n spatial time series\"\n\n# ============================================================================\n\n# STEP 0: DATA PREPARATION\n\n# ============================================================================\n\ntransform T_prepare :\n intent: define-unit\n manner: \"spatio-temporal aggregation\"\n input: D_raw\n output: D_locations, F_TS\n actor: hybrid\n description: \"Transform raw spatio-temporal data into spatial time\n series by dividing territory into spatial compartments and\n aggregating attribute values by location and time interval\"\n\nartifact D_locations : entities\n internal structure: elementary\n embedment: space\n description: \"Spatial locations or objects, each associated with a\n numeric time series\"\n\nartifact F_TS : feature(D_locations)\n value structure: vector\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Numeric time series of attribute values, one per\n spatial location\"\n\n# ============================================================================\n# SPECIFICATIONS AND INITIAL LOOP ARTIFACTS\n# ============================================================================\n\nartifact S_clustering : specification\n origin: given\n representation form: \"parameter settings\"\n description: \"Initial clustering parameters: number of clusters and\n distance measure\"\n\nartifact K_refinement_strategy : knowledge\n origin: given\n representation form: \"refinement strategy\"\n description: \"Refinement guidance from prior residual analysis;\n initially neutral (no prior guidance available)\"\n\n# ============================================================================\n# OUTER LOOP: ANALYSIS CYCLE (Steps 1-3)\n# ============================================================================\n\nloop L_analysis:\n purpose: \"Iteratively group time series, build statistical models,\n and evaluate model quality until residual distributions indicate\n satisfactory spatio-temporal models\"\n until: \"Model residuals are randomly distributed over time and space\n for all groups\"\n body:\n\n # ================================================================\n # STEP 1: GROUPING (inner loop for cluster refinement)\n # ================================================================\n\n loop L_grouping:\n purpose: \"Iteratively cluster and refine grouping until groups\n are homogeneous and form meaningful spatial patterns\"\n until: \"Groups exhibit sufficient within-group homogeneity and\n interpretable spatial patterns\"\n body:\n\n transform T_cluster :\n intent: define-unit\n manner: \"clustering by temporal similarity\"\n input: D_locations, F_TS, S_clustering\n output: D_groups, F_group_label\n actor: hybrid\n description: \"Group time series by similarity of temporal\n variation; includes progressive clustering of\n heterogeneous groups\"\n\n artifact D_groups : entities\n internal structure: group/cluster\n embedment: set\n description: \"Groups of spatial locations with similar\n temporal variation\"\n\n artifact F_group_label : feature(D_locations)\n value structure: atomic\n value type: categorical\n description: \"Cluster membership identifier for each\n location\"\n\n transform T_vis_timegraph :\n intent: visualise\n input: F_TS, F_group_label\n output: V_timegraph\n actor: machine\n description: \"Display time series colored by cluster\n membership in detailed or summarized form\"\n\n artifact V_timegraph : visualisation(F_TS, F_group_label)\n layout: \"temporal axis\"\n form: \"colored lines and summary bands\"\n encoding: \"color from cluster membership; vertical position\n from value; quintile stripes for summarized view\"\n description: \"Time graph showing temporal variation of time\n series grouped by cluster\"\n\n transform T_vis_map :\n intent: visualise\n input: D_locations, F_group_label\n output: V_map\n actor: machine\n description: \"Display spatial distribution of clusters on a\n map with similarity-based coloring\"\n\n artifact V_map : visualisation(D_locations, F_group_label)\n layout: \"geographic map\"\n form: \"colored areas\"\n encoding: \"color from cluster membership; similar colors\n reflect similar cluster centres\"\n description: \"Map showing spatial distribution of clusters\"\n\n transform T_assess_grouping :\n intent: assess\n input: V_timegraph, V_map, D_groups\n output: K_grouping_quality\n actor: human\n description: \"Assess within-group homogeneity on the time\n graph and spatial pattern interpretability on the map\"\n\n artifact K_grouping_quality : knowledge(D_groups)\n representation form: \"quality judgment\"\n description: \"Assessment of grouping quality: homogeneity,\n spatial interpretability, and whether refinement is\n needed\"\n\n if K_grouping_quality indicates satisfactory grouping:\n then:\n exit loop L_grouping\n else:\n transform T_adjust_clustering :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n manner: \"adjust clustering approach\"\n input: K_grouping_quality, V_timegraph, V_map,\n S_clustering\n output: S_clustering_g\n actor: human\n description: \"Adjust clustering parameters: modify\n number of clusters, apply progressive clustering\n to heterogeneous groups, or change distance\n measure\"\n\n artifact S_clustering_g : specification\n representation form: \"parameter settings\"\n description: \"Updated clustering parameters for\n grouping refinement\"\n\n assign:\n S_clustering := S_clustering_g\n\n end loop L_grouping\n\n # ================================================================\n # STEP 2: ANALYSIS AND MODELLING\n # ================================================================\n\n # Step 2a: Identify temporal characteristics\n\n transform T_identify_characteristics :\n intent: abstract\n input: V_timegraph, D_groups\n output: P_temporal_chars\n actor: human\n description: \"Identify characteristics of temporal variation by\n visual inspection: periodicity, cycle lengths, and trends\"\n\n artifact P_temporal_chars : pattern(D_groups)\n representation form: \"identified temporal characteristics\"\n description: \"Characteristics of temporal variation within each\n group: periodicity, cycle lengths, trends\"\n\n # Step 2b: Derive representative time series\n\n transform T_derive_representative :\n intent: characterise\n manner: \"aggregate within-group statistics\"\n input: D_groups, F_TS\n output: F_representative\n actor: hybrid\n description: \"Derive representative time series for each group\n from mean, median, or percentile values at each time step\"\n\n artifact F_representative : feature(D_groups)\n value structure: vector\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Representative time series capturing typical\n temporal variation for each group, derived from mean,\n median, or percentile values\"\n\n # Step 2c: Configure and build model\n\n transform T_configure_model :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n input: P_temporal_chars, K_refinement_strategy\n output: S_model_config\n actor: human\n description: \"For each group, select a suitable modelling method\n and configure initial parameters based on identified\n temporal characteristics and, when available, refinement\n guidance from prior residual analysis\"\n\n artifact S_model_config : specification\n representation form: \"model configuration\"\n description: \"Model type selection, smoothing coefficients,\n cycle length, trend parameters, and initialisation values\"\n\n transform T_build_model :\n intent: build-model\n input: F_representative, S_model_config\n output: M_temporal\n actor: machine\n description: \"For each group, fit the selected statistical model\n to the representative time series with automatic parameter\n optimization; may involve per-cycle models when multiple\n temporal cycles are present\"\n\n artifact M_temporal : model(F_representative, P_temporal_chars)\n model type: \"statistical time series model\"\n representation form: \"fitted parametric model\"\n description: \"Statistical model of characteristic temporal\n variation for each group, fitted to representative time\n series; may be a combination of per-cycle models when\n multiple temporal cycles are present\"\n\n # Step 2d: Model refinement (inner loop)\n\n loop L_modelling:\n purpose: \"Iteratively adjust model parameters until the model\n curve captures the characteristic temporal variation\"\n until: \"Model curve adequately represents the general temporal\n variation pattern\"\n body:\n\n transform T_predict :\n intent: characterise\n input: M_temporal, D_groups\n output: F_model_curve\n actor: machine\n description: \"Generate model-predicted values for original\n and future time steps\"\n\n artifact F_model_curve : feature(D_groups)\n value structure: vector\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Model-predicted values representing\n characteristic temporal variation for each group\"\n\n transform T_vis_model :\n intent: visualise\n input: F_model_curve, F_representative, F_TS\n output: V_model\n actor: machine\n description: \"Display model curve on time graph alongside\n representative and individual time series\"\n\n artifact V_model : visualisation(F_model_curve,\n F_representative, F_TS)\n layout: \"temporal axis\"\n form: \"lines\"\n encoding: \"color distinguishing model curve from\n representative and individual series; extended range\n for future predictions\"\n description: \"Time graph showing model prediction overlaid\n on data for visual comparison\"\n\n transform T_assess_fit :\n intent: assess\n input: V_model\n output: K_model_fit\n actor: human\n description: \"Assess whether model curve captures the\n general temporal variation pattern\"\n\n artifact K_model_fit : knowledge(M_temporal)\n representation form: \"quality judgment\"\n description: \"Assessment of model fit and whether parameter\n refinement is needed\"\n\n if K_model_fit indicates satisfactory fit:\n then:\n exit loop L_modelling\n else:\n transform T_adjust_model_config :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n input: K_model_fit, V_model, S_model_config\n output: S_model_config_m\n actor: human\n description: \"Adjust model parameters or method\n based on fit assessment and visual inspection\n of the model curve\"\n\n artifact S_model_config_m : specification\n representation form: \"model configuration\"\n description: \"Updated model configuration with\n adjusted parameters\"\n\n transform T_refit_model :\n intent: build-model\n manner: \"re-fitting with adjusted parameters\"\n input: F_representative, S_model_config_m\n output: M_temporal_r\n actor: machine\n description: \"Re-fit model with updated\n configuration\"\n\n artifact M_temporal_r : model(F_representative,\n P_temporal_chars)\n model type: \"statistical time series model\"\n representation form: \"fitted parametric model\"\n description: \"Refined temporal model with adjusted\n parameters\"\n\n assign:\n S_model_config := S_model_config_m\n M_temporal := M_temporal_r\n\n end loop L_modelling\n\n # ================================================================\n # STEP 3: MODEL EVALUATION\n # ================================================================\n\n transform T_compute_residuals :\n intent: characterise\n input: D_locations, F_TS, M_temporal, D_groups\n output: F_residuals\n actor: machine\n description: \"Compute per-location residuals as differences\n between actual values and individually adjusted model\n predictions\"\n\n artifact F_residuals : feature(D_locations)\n value structure: vector\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Model residual time series for each location,\n computed as differences between actual values and\n individually adjusted model predictions\"\n\n transform T_vis_residuals_temporal :\n intent: visualise\n input: F_residuals, D_groups\n output: V_residuals_temporal\n actor: machine\n description: \"Display temporal distribution of residuals as\n quintile summaries and segmented temporal histograms\"\n\n artifact V_residuals_temporal : visualisation(F_residuals, D_groups)\n layout: \"temporal axis\"\n form: \"summary bands and histogram bars\"\n encoding: \"quintile stripes for distribution shape; color-coded\n segments for residual value intervals\"\n description: \"Time graph summarizing residual distributions\n over time\"\n\n transform T_vis_residuals_spatial :\n intent: visualise\n input: F_residuals, D_locations\n output: V_residuals_spatial\n actor: machine\n description: \"Display spatial distribution of residuals on a\n map\"\n\n artifact V_residuals_spatial : visualisation(F_residuals,\n D_locations)\n layout: \"geographic map\"\n form: \"colored areas\"\n encoding: \"color for residual magnitude\"\n description: \"Map showing spatial distribution of model\n residuals\"\n\n transform T_assess_residuals :\n intent: assess\n input: V_residuals_temporal, V_residuals_spatial, D_groups\n output: K_residual_quality\n actor: human\n description: \"Assess whether residuals are randomly distributed\n over time and space; may involve clustering residual time\n series to isolate subgroups with systematic non-random\n patterns\"\n\n artifact K_residual_quality : knowledge(M_temporal, D_groups)\n representation form: \"quality judgment\"\n description: \"Assessment of residual distributions: presence or\n absence of systematic temporal or spatial patterns\"\n\n if K_residual_quality indicates random residual distribution:\n then:\n exit loop L_analysis\n else:\n transform T_decide_refinement :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n input: K_residual_quality, V_residuals_temporal,\n V_residuals_spatial, S_clustering\n output: S_clustering_a, K_refinement_strategy_a\n actor: human\n description: \"Determine refinement approach from residual\n patterns: subdivide groups by updating clustering\n parameters, adjust the modelling approach, or both\"\n\n artifact S_clustering_a : specification\n representation form: \"parameter settings\"\n description: \"Potentially updated clustering parameters;\n unchanged if only modelling adjustments are needed\"\n\n artifact K_refinement_strategy_a : knowledge(M_temporal,\n D_groups)\n representation form: \"refinement strategy\"\n description: \"Decision on whether to subdivide groups,\n adjust modelling method or parameters, or both\"\n\n assign:\n S_clustering := S_clustering_a\n K_refinement_strategy := K_refinement_strategy_a\n\nend loop L_analysis\n\n# ============================================================================\n\n# STEP 4: MODEL EXTERNALIZATION\n\n# ============================================================================\n\ntransform T_externalize :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n input: M_temporal, D_groups\n output: K_externalized\n actor: machine\n description: \"Store model descriptions externally in reusable format\n including modelling method, parameters, group membership, and\n distribution statistics for each location\"\n\nartifact K_externalized : knowledge(M_temporal, D_groups)\n representation form: \"formal descriptions and data files\"\n description: \"Externally stored model descriptions enabling\n re-creation, review, communication, prediction, and further\n analysis\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n\nPlease consider these additional comments and examples.\n", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user wants me to revise the ATWL syntax highlighting based on their feedback:\n\n1. \"artifact\" and \"transform\" should have the highest prominence\n2. Remove \"gen-knowledge\" (it's not a valid intent)\n3. \"human\", \"machine\", \"hybrid\" form a separate \"actors\" category\n4. Other enumerated values (structure types, value types, embedment types) should be less prominent\n5. Strings should not be too prominent\n\nLet me also look at the example to understand the language better:\n\nFrom the example, I can see:\n- `workflow`, `artifact`, `transform`, `loop`, `end loop`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit` are structural/control keywords\n\n\n- `artifact` and `transform` are the primary keywords that need the most visual weight\n- Artifact types include `entities`, `feature`, `arrangement`, `visualisation`, `pattern`, `model`, `knowledge`, and `specification`\n- Transform intents are `define-unit`, `characterise`, `contextualise`, `visualise`, `abstract`, `build-model`, `generate-knowledge`, and `assess`\n- Field names like `template`, `description`, `origin`, `intent`, `manner`, `input`, `output`, `actor`, `purpose`, `until`, `body`, `features`, `id`, `layout`, `form`, and `encoding` need appropriate styling\n- Additional field names include `context`, `principle`, `embedment`, `internal structure`, `value structure`, `value type`, `representation form`, and `model type`\n- Actors can be `human`, `machine`, or `hybrid`\n- There's a set of enumerated values like `given`, `elementary`, `group/cluster`, `episode`, `region`, `sequence`, `formation`, `atomic`, `list`, `vector`, `matrix`, `relational`, `set`, `time`, `space`, `numeric`, `ordinal`, `categorical`, `temporal`, `spatial`, `text`, and `reference`\n\nNow I'm reorganizing the visual hierarchy: `artifact` and `transform` get the boldest treatment with the most prominent color, control keywords like `workflow`, `loop`, `end`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, and `exit` get bold styling but slightly less emphasis, and artifact types follow with their own visual tier. Configuring keyword highlighting in listings...\n\nThe core problem is that `listings` can't distinguish between different contexts—so a word like `model` gets the same color whether it's part of a field name like `model type:` or used as an artifact type in `model(...)`. I need to make strategic choices about which usage takes priority. `model` should probably be highlighted as an artifact type since that's its main role, while words like `type`, `structure`, and `form` can be colored as field-name indicators. The same issue applies to `visualise`, which appears in multiple contexts, so I need to decide which one matters most.\n\nLooking at the `listings` documentation, I can define up to 16 keyword classes, which gives me plenty of room. I'm thinking of creating a top-tier category for `artifact` and `transform` since the user emphasized those should have the highest prominence, then organizing the remaining keywords into groups with appropriate styling. I'm noticing a conflict with `model` since it appears both as an artifact type keyword and within the field name \"model type\". I'll prioritize it as an artifact type, so when it appears in \"model type:\" the word gets highlighted as an artifact type while \"type\" gets highlighted as a field name—it's a minor visual inconsistency but should still work. Let me reconsider how artifact type declarations are actually structured in the syntax. I'm noticing that multi-word field names like `internal structure`, `value type`, and `representation form` would need each component word highlighted separately in the syntax, which creates a potential conflict—particularly with `type` appearing both as part of `value type` and `model type`, and `form` overlapping with `representation form`. So `type`, `form`, `structure`, `internal`, and `representation` are all safe to highlight since they only appear as field name components. The real conflict is `model`, which functions as both an artifact type and part of field names—I'll prioritize it as an artifact type. Now I'm settling on three highlight groups: the core artifacts and transforms at the top level, then control flow keywords, and finally the artifact type names themselves.\n\nBeyond those, I need to account for the intent keywords like `define-unit` and `characterise`, the full set of field labels including `template`, `description`, `origin`, and the rest, plus the actor types. Though I'm noticing `intent` creates a subtle issue—it's a field label in the syntax, but the actual intent values are the keywords that follow it.\n\nThere are a few other potential overlaps to consider. `abstract` shows up as an intent keyword, but it could also appear naturally in descriptive text, which is fine since string content takes priority. Similarly, `visualise` is an intent keyword while `visualisation` is an artifact type—different enough that there's no real conflict. Looking at the field names in practice, `form` appears both standalone and as part of compound labels like `representation form`, which works cleanly.\n\nFor `model type`, there's a slight visual inconsistency where `model` gets highlighted as an artifact type and `type` as a field name, creating a two-tone effect on that compound label. It's not ideal, but it's acceptable since `model` as a standalone artifact type is more important to emphasize than its role in the field name. I could remove `model` from the artifact types list entirely, but that would undermine the goal of making artifact types visually prominent.\n\nNow I'm thinking through what happens when `body:` appears as a keyword. I'm deciding whether to highlight `given` as a subtle marker since it indicates exogenous artifacts, but the user's guidance suggests enumerated values shouldn't be prominent, so I'll skip highlighting them entirely and focus on the six keyword groups that `listings` supports. I'm now checking whether higher-numbered keyword groups override lower ones when using `morekeywords`. I'm finishing the overlap check for Group 5's remaining fields and confirming there are no conflicts with the other groups — everything looks clear so far.\n\nNow I'm noticing a potential visual inconsistency: `model` would appear as an artifact type keyword (teal bold) while `type` would render as a field name (orange), which creates an awkward split in what should read as a single compound field label `model type:`. Since artifact types are a priority and `model` is primarily used as an artifact type in the actual syntax, I'll keep it there and accept the minor visual inconsistency in the field naming.\n\nMoving on to strings—the user wants them subdued, so I'm thinking a muted dark gray or olive tone to keep them from competing for attention. Let me map out the full color hierarchy: `artifact` and `transform` get bold dark navy for maximum weight, control keywords get bold medium blue, artifact types get bold teal, intents get bold purple, field names stay unbolded in dark orange, and actors get bold italic dark green for their special status. Strings will be muted to stay in the background.\n\nNow I'm working through some edge cases—`group/cluster` is tricky because the slash isn't handled by the standard letter settings, and since enumerated values aren't critical to the user, I'll leave it as-is. Multi-word keywords like `end loop` and `exit loop` will both highlight properly since each word is in Group 2. I'm ready to write the final styling code. Defining the color scheme... Finalizing the color scheme with bold dark navy blue for Group 1 to make it maximally prominent, and bold medium blue for Group 2 as a slightly softer structural element. Now I'm noticing that intent names like `define-unit` and `visualise` appear within template fields and need consistent styling treatment.\n\nLooking at how control keywords like `if`, `then`, and `else` would be highlighted in conditional statements, and considering edge cases where an identifier might theoretically match a keyword name—though that's unlikely to be a practical concern with this syntax.\n\nI should definitely keep `body` as a field name keyword since it's a structural element of loop definitions. For multi-word constructs like `end loop` or `exit loop`, both words would get highlighted separately, which works fine. On `origin: given`—`origin` is a field name that gets highlighted, but `given` as an enumerated value wouldn't be, following the preference to not highlight those kinds of values even though they do carry semantic meaning.\n\nI'm settling on the final approach: six keyword groups, line comments starting with `#`, strings in `\"...\"` with muted styling, and operators like `->` and `:=` handled through the literate syntax. Time to write this up.\n\n## Revised Category Design\n\nBased on your feedback, here's a restructured categorization:\n\n| # | Category | Keywords | Rationale |\n|---|----------|----------|-----------|\n| 1 | **Primary declarations** | `artifact`, `transform` | Highest prominence — the language's core concepts |\n| 2 | **Control & structure** | `workflow`, `loop`, `end`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit` | Workflow-level structural elements |\n| 3 | **Artifact types** | `entities`, `feature`, `arrangement`, `visualisation`, `pattern`, `model`, `knowledge`, `specification` | What artifacts ARE |\n| 4 | **Transform intents** | `define-unit`, `characterise`, `contextualise`, `visualise`, `abstract`, `build-model`, `generate-knowledge`, `assess` | What transforms DO |\n| 5 | **Field names** | `template`, `description`, `origin`, `intent`, `manner`, `input`, `output`, `actor`, `purpose`, `until`, `body`, `features`, `id`, `layout`, `form`, `encoding`, `context`, `principle`, `embedment`, `internal`, `structure`, `value`, `type`, `representation` | Property labels — present but subordinate |\n| 6 | **Actors** | `human`, `machine`, `hybrid` | Who performs the transform |\n| — | **Strings** | `\"...\"` | Muted — arbitrary free text |\n| — | **Comments** | `# ...` | Gray italic |\n| — | **Operators** | `->`, `:=` | Flow and assignment |\n\nEnumerated values (`given`, `elementary`, `atomic`, `numeric`, etc.) are left **unhighlighted** per your guidance.\n\n## Complete LaTeX Code\n\n```latex\n\\usepackage{xcolor}\n\\usepackage{listings}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n% ATWL colour palette\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\definecolor{atwl-primary}{RGB}{0,0,153} % Deep navy – highest prominence\n\\definecolor{atwl-control}{RGB}{40,70,110} % Slate blue – structural\n\\definecolor{atwl-type}{RGB}{0,120,120} % Teal – artifact types\n\\definecolor{atwl-intent}{RGB}{120,0,120} % Purple – transform intents\n\\definecolor{atwl-field}{RGB}{154,80,0} % Sienna – field labels\n\\definecolor{atwl-actor}{RGB}{0,100,0} % Dark green – actors\n\\definecolor{atwl-string}{RGB}{100,100,100} % Muted gray – free text\n\\definecolor{atwl-comment}{RGB}{106,115,125} % Gray – comments\n\\definecolor{atwl-operator}{RGB}{180,0,0} % Dark red – flow operators\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n% Language definition\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\lstdefinelanguage{ATWL}{\n alsoletter={-},\n sensitive=true,\n %\n % Group 1: Primary declarations (highest prominence)\n morekeywords=[1]{artifact, transform},\n %\n % Group 2: Control and structural keywords\n morekeywords=[2]{workflow, loop, end, assign, if, then, else, exit},\n %\n % Group 3: Artifact types\n morekeywords=[3]{entities, feature, arrangement, visualisation,\n pattern, model, knowledge, specification},\n %\n % Group 4: Transform intents\n morekeywords=[4]{define-unit, characterise, contextualise, visualise,\n abstract, build-model, generate-knowledge, assess},\n %\n % Group 5: Field / property names\n morekeywords=[5]{template, description, origin, intent, manner,\n input, output, actor, purpose, until, body, features, id,\n layout, form, encoding, context, principle, embedment,\n internal, structure, value, type, representation},\n %\n % Group 6: Actors\n morekeywords=[6]{human, machine, hybrid},\n %\n % Comments and strings\n morecomment=[l]{\\#},\n morestring=[b]\",\n}\n\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n% Style definition\n% -----------------------------------------------------------------\n\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n language=ATWL,\n basicstyle=\\small\\ttfamily,\n xleftmargin=1em,\n framexleftmargin=0.5em,\n frame=l,\n framerule=0.6pt,\n breaklines=true,\n columns=flexible,\n keepspaces=true,\n aboveskip=0.8em,\n belowskip=0.8em,\n % Group styles\n keywordstyle=[1]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-primary}, % artifact, transform\n keywordstyle=[2]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-control}, % workflow, loop, ...\n keywordstyle=[3]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-type}, % entities, feature, ...\n keywordstyle=[4]\\bfseries\\color{atwl-intent}, % define-unit, ...\n keywordstyle=[5]\\color{atwl-field}, % field names (no bold)\n keywordstyle=[6]\\bfseries\\itshape\\color{atwl-actor}, % human, machine, hybrid\n % Strings, comments, operators\n commentstyle=\\itshape\\color{atwl-comment},\n stringstyle=\\color{atwl-string},\n % Operator highlighting\n literate={->}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{\\textrightarrow}}}2\n {:=}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{:=}}}2,\n}\n```\n\n## Design Notes\n\n1. **`artifact` and `transform`** get bold + the deepest, most saturated blue — they jump out immediately.\n\n2. **Actors** use bold italic to distinguish them from all other categories at a glance, without needing a loud color.\n\n3. **Field names** are intentionally non-bold — they provide orientation without competing with the primary structure.\n\n4. **Strings** use a neutral gray so that lengthy `description:` values don't dominate the visual field.\n\n5. **`->`** is rendered as `→` (`\\textrightarrow`) for visual clarity; if you prefer the literal ASCII arrow, replace with `{->}` in the literate mapping.\n\n6. **Known minor compromise:** The word `model` in the compound field `model type:` will appear in teal (artifact-type style) rather than sienna. This is acceptable because `model` as an artifact type is its primary semantic role.\n\nWould you like me to adjust any colors, swap the `→` back to `->`, change the actor styling, or tweak the prominence balance?", "role": "assistant" }, { "content": "The problem is not in highlighting keywords within free text (perhaps, that would be OK), but in showing spaces by symbols ", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user is showing that the `columns=flexible` and `keepspaces=true` settings combined with the `literate` option are causing visible space symbols (like `␣`) to appear in the output, particularly within strings/free text. \n\nLooking at the screenshots, the spaces inside strings are being shown as visible space characters (the `␣` symbol). This is a known issue with the `literate` replacement in `listings` — it can interfere with how spaces are rendered.\n\nActually, looking more carefully at the first screenshot, it seems like spaces within the string text are being shown as visible \"cup\" symbols (␣). This is likely caused by the `columns=flexible` setting interacting with `literate`, or possibly by `showspaces=true` being set somewhere.\n\n\nThe real culprit is the `literate` option itself — it's a known quirk of the `listings` package that can inadvertently activate visible spaces. The solution is to add a space mapping within the `literate` definition that explicitly converts spaces to normal spacing, preventing them from rendering as visible symbols. The standard solution is to add a space mapping to the literate list so spaces render normally instead of becoming visible characters. I could either include the space directly in the literate mapping or use a backslash-escaped space, but honestly, the most reliable approach might be to skip the literate option altogether or find an alternative method for highlighting operators, since this space-visualization issue is a well-known quirk of the listings package.\n\n## The Problem\n\nThis is a well-known bug in the `listings` package: when you use the `literate` option, it disrupts internal space handling and causes spaces to be rendered as visible `␣` symbols.\n\n## The Fix\n\n**Option A — Remove `literate` entirely (simplest):**\n\n```latex\n% Remove this:\n% literate={->}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{\\textrightarrow}}}2\n% {:=}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{:=}}}2,\n```\n\nThis sacrifices operator coloring but eliminates the bug completely.\n\n**Option B — Add a space mapping to `literate` (keeps operator highlighting):**\n\n```latex\n literate={->}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{\\textrightarrow}}}2\n {:=}{{\\textcolor{atwl-operator}{:=}}}2\n {\\ }{{\\space}}1,\n```\n\nThis explicitly tells `listings` to render each space as a normal space character.\n\n**Option C — Use `moredelim` instead of `literate`** (recommended compromise):\n\n```latex\n\\lstdefinestyle{atwl}{\n language=ATWL,\n % ... all other settings unchanged ...\n % NO literate option\n moredelim=[is][\\textcolor{atwl-operator}]{|>}{<|}, % manual markup if needed\n}\n```\n\n---\n\nI'd recommend **Option B** first — just add `{\\ }{{\\space}}1` at the end of your `literate` list. If it still misbehaves, fall back to **Option A** (simply removing `literate`). The operator coloring is a nice-to-have, not worth broken output.", "role": "assistant" }, { "content": "Option B worked well. A minor problem: \"loop\", \"if\", \"then\", etc. are not well distinguishable. Perhaps, dark red could be better? These keys are not very frequent; using more prominent color would not overwhelm", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user wants to change the color of the control/structure keywords (Group 2: `workflow`, `loop`, `end`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit`) from slate blue to dark red for better distinguishability.\n\nSimple change - just update the color definition.\n\nGood idea. Simply change the color definition for `atwl-control`:\n\n```latex\n\\definecolor{atwl-control}{RGB}{160,30,30} % Dark red – structural/control\n```\n\nThis gives strong contrast against the deep navy of `artifact`/`transform` and the purple of intents, without clashing with the muted operator red (`180,0,0`). If you find it too close to the operators, you can shift slightly toward brick/crimson:\n\n```latex\n\\definecolor{atwl-control}{RGB}{150,20,50} % Crimson – structural/control\n```\n\nEither way, the infrequent `loop`, `if`, `end loop` etc. will now pop clearly when scanning a long workflow.", "role": "assistant" }, { "content": "Now I am satisfied with the syntax highlighting in the PDF generated from Latex sources. Now I want to produce an HTML page for each workflow with similar syntax highlighting. Try first with one example. Here is the content of a tex file, transform it to an HTML page:\n\\section{Example: Cluster-Calendar Workflow Represented in ATWL}\n\\label{sec:cluster-calendar_ATWL}\nSource \\cite{vanWijkSelow1999}:\nJarke J. van Wijk and Edward R. van Selow. \\\\\nCluster and calendar based visualization of time series data. \\\\\nIn Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis ’99), pages 4–9, \\\\\nLos Alamitos, CA, USA, 1999. IEEE Computer Society.\\\\\ndoi: 10.1109/INFVIS.1999.801851\n\n\\subsection*{Concise Workflow Summary}\nThe cluster-calendar workflow combines hierarchical clustering with calendar-based visualization to identify and analyse recurring patterns in time series data measured at regular intervals (e.g., hourly) over extended periods. The workflow partitions continuous time series into daily episodes, characterizes each day by its temporal profile, and applies hierarchical bottom-up clustering to group days with similar patterns. Users iteratively refine the cluster structure—adjusting the number of clusters, selecting alternative distance measures, or focusing on specific time intervals—until meaningful behavioural patterns emerge. The results are presented through coordinated visualizations: a calendar view where days are colour-coded by cluster membership to reveal weekly and seasonal distributions, and line graphs showing the average temporal profile for each cluster to illustrate characteristic patterns. Through interactive exploration of these coordinated views, analysts identify both standard patterns (e.g., typical weekdays, weekends, seasonal variations) and exceptional days (e.g., holidays, special events), formulating insights about temporal regularities and anomalies that would be difficult to detect through traditional time series analysis methods.\n\nA flow diagram representing the Cluster-Calendar workflow is shown in Fig.\\ref{fig:cluster-calendar}.\n\n\\subsection*{ATWL representation:}\n\\begin{lstlisting}[style=atwl, basicstyle=\\footnotesize\\ttfamily]\nworkflow cluster-calendar\n template: define-unit -> contextualise -> characterise ->\n loop(define-unit (similarity) -> characterise -> \n visualise -> abstract -> assess) -> generate-knowledge\n description: \"Analyze daily patterns via clustering and calendar visualization.\"\n\nartifact D_hour : entities\n origin: given\n internal structure: elementary\n embedment: time\n features:\n - id: f_value\n value structure: atomic\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Measured value\"\n description: \"Regular time series measurements\"\n\nartifact D_calendar : entities\n origin: given\n internal structure: elementary\n embedment: time\n features:\n - id: f_temporal_coords\n value structure: vector\n value type: {categorical, numeric}\n description: \"Month, weekday, day number\"\n description: \"Calendar reference structure\"\n\ntransform T_partition :\n intent: define-unit\n manner: \"time-partitioning into daily episodes\"\n input: D_hour\n output: D_day\n actor: machine\n description: \"Partition series into 24-hour episodes\"\n\nartifact D_day : entities\n internal structure: episode\n embedment: time\n features:\n - id: f_day_index\n value structure: atomic\n value type: ordinal\n description: \"Collection of daily episodes\"\n\ntransform T_arrange :\n intent: contextualise\n manner: \"calendar-based\"\n input: D_day, D_calendar\n output: A_calendar\n actor: machine\n\nartifact A_calendar : arrangement(D_day)\n context: D_calendar\n principle: \"calendar date mapping to grid\"\n\ntransform T_profile :\n intent: characterise\n manner: \"extract temporal profile\"\n input: D_day\n output: F_day_profile\n actor: machine\n\nartifact F_day_profile : feature(D_day)\n value structure: vector\n value type: numeric\n description: \"Sequence of measurements per day\"\n\nartifact S_clustering : specification\n origin: given\n representation form: \"parameter settings\"\n description: \"Initial clustering params: K, distance measure\"\n\nloop L1:\n purpose: \"Explore cluster structure for daily patterns\"\n until: \"Meaningful patterns and exceptions identified\"\n body:\n transform T_cluster :\n intent: define-unit\n manner: \"hierarchical clustering\"\n input: D_day, F_day_profile, S_clustering\n output: D_cluster, F_cluster_label\n actor: hybrid\n\n artifact D_cluster : entities\n internal structure: group/cluster\n embedment: set\n description: \"Groups of similar daily profiles\"\n\n artifact F_cluster_label : feature(D_day)\n value structure: atomic\n value type: categorical\n\n transform T_aggregate :\n intent: characterise\n manner: \"aggregate profiles\"\n input: D_cluster, F_day_profile\n output: F_cluster_profile\n actor: machine\n\n artifact F_cluster_profile : feature(D_cluster)\n value structure: vector\n description: \"Average profile per cluster\"\n\n transform T_calendar_vis :\n intent: visualise\n manner: \"color-coded calendar\"\n input: A_calendar, F_cluster_label\n output: V_calendar\n actor: machine\n\n artifact V_calendar : visualisation(A_calendar, F_cluster_label)\n layout: \"calendar grid\"\n encoding: \"position: A_calendar; color: cluster\"\n\n transform T_profile_vis :\n intent: visualise\n manner: \"line graphs\"\n input: F_cluster_profile, D_cluster\n output: V_profiles\n\n artifact V_profiles : visualisation(F_cluster_profile)\n form: \"line graphs (one per cluster)\"\n\n transform T_interpret :\n intent: abstract\n manner: \"interpret meanings\"\n input: V_calendar, V_profiles\n output: P_patterns\n actor: human\n\n artifact P_patterns : pattern(D_cluster)\n representation form: \"text labels (e.g., 'weekend')\"\n\n transform T_assess_clusters :\n intent: assess\n manner: \"evaluate quality\"\n input: V_calendar, V_profiles, P_patterns\n output: cluster_assessment\n actor: human\n\n artifact cluster_assessment : knowledge(D_cluster)\n representation form: \"quality judgment\"\n\n if cluster_assessment indicates refinement:\n then:\n transform T_adjust :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n manner: \"adjust parameters\"\n input: cluster_assessment, S_clustering\n output: S_clustering'\n actor: human\n\n artifact S_clustering' : specification\n \n assign:\n S_clustering := S_clustering'\n else:\n exit loop L1\nend loop L1\n\ntransform T_synthesize :\n intent: generate-knowledge\n manner: \"formulate statements\"\n input: P_patterns, V_calendar, V_profiles\n output: K1\n actor: human\n\nartifact K1 : knowledge(P_patterns)\n representation form: \"statements and explanations\"\n description: \"Final understanding of temporal patterns\"\n\\end{lstlisting}\n", "role": "user" }, { "content": "The user wants me to convert the LaTeX content into an HTML page with syntax highlighting that mimics the ATWL style they defined for LaTeX. Let me create a complete HTML page with:\n\n1. The section title\n2. The source citation\n3. The concise workflow summary\n4. The ATWL code with syntax highlighting using CSS that matches the color scheme:\n - Primary declarations (`artifact`, `transform`): Bold, deep navy (#000099)\n - Control/structure (`workflow`, `loop`, `end`, `assign`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit`): Bold, dark red (#A01E1E)\n - Artifact types (`entities`, `feature`, `arrangement`, `visualisation`, `pattern`, `model`, `knowledge`, `specification`): Bold, teal (#007878)\n - Transform intents (`define-unit`, `characterise`, `contextualise`, `visualise`, `abstract`, `build-model`, `generate-knowledge`, `assess`): Bold, purple (#780078)\n - Field names and other keywords: Bold, dark gray (#333333)\n - Actors (`human`, `machine`, `hybrid`): Bold italic, dark green (#006400)\n - Strings (`\"...\"`): Muted gray (#646464)\n - Comments (`# ...`): Gray italic (#6A7380)\n - Operators (`->`, `:=`): Dark red (#B40000)\n\nNow I'm building a JavaScript syntax highlighter that tokenizes the input properly. I need to handle the parsing order carefully—comments and strings first to avoid highlighting keywords inside them, then process the remaining text for keywords and operators.\n\nBuilding the HTML page...\n\n```html\n\n\n\n\n\nCluster-Calendar Workflow – ATWL Representation\n\n\n\n\n

Example: Cluster-Calendar Workflow Represented in ATWL

\n\n
\n Source: Jarke J. van Wijk and Edward R. van Selow.\n Cluster and calendar based visualization of time series data.\n In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis '99), pages 4–9,\n Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 1999. IEEE Computer Society.\n doi: 10.1109/INFVIS.1999.801851\n
\n\n

Concise Workflow Summary

\n
\nThe cluster-calendar workflow combines hierarchical clustering with calendar-based visualization to identify and analyse recurring patterns in time series data measured at regular intervals (e.g., hourly) over extended periods. The workflow partitions continuous time series into daily episodes, characterizes each day by its temporal profile, and applies hierarchical bottom-up clustering to group days with similar patterns. Users iteratively refine the cluster structure—adjusting the number of clusters, selecting alternative distance measures, or focusing on specific time intervals—until meaningful behavioural patterns emerge. The results are presented through coordinated visualizations: a calendar view where days are colour-coded by cluster membership to reveal weekly and seasonal distributions, and line graphs showing the average temporal profile for each cluster to illustrate characteristic patterns. Through interactive exploration of these coordinated views, analysts identify both standard patterns (e.g., typical weekdays, weekends, seasonal variations) and exceptional days (e.g., holidays, special events), formulating insights about temporal regularities and anomalies that would be difficult to detect through traditional time series analysis methods.\n
\n\n

ATWL Representation

\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n```\n\nThis produces a self-contained HTML page with:\n\n- **No external dependencies** — all styling and highlighting is inline\n- **Client-side JavaScript tokenizer** that processes the ATWL source on page load\n- **Same color scheme** as your LaTeX version:\n  - `artifact`, `transform` → bold deep navy\n  - `workflow`, `loop`, `if`, `then`, `else`, `exit`, `end`, `assign` → bold dark red\n  - Artifact types → bold teal\n  - Intents → bold purple\n  - Field names → sienna (no bold)\n  - Actors → bold italic dark green\n  - Strings → muted gray\n  - Comments → gray italic\n  - `->` rendered as `→` in dark red; `:=` in dark red\n\nSave it as an `.html` file and open in a browser to verify the result. Want me to adjust any colors, or shall we proceed to batch-convert all your workflow files?",
    "role": "assistant"
  }
]