Eric S Fraga <e.fr...@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
> but behaviour that I can accept, especially as the easy solution is to
> simply enclose the equation in a latex block:
>
> * equation with leading minus sign
> The following equation
> #+begin_latex
> \begin{equation}
> \label{eq:test}
> y = 3 x
> - 5
> + 4
> \end{equation}
> #+end_latex
>
> This works just fine and is probably for the best in any case. Using a
> latex block allows for latex specific editing (C-c '). Should have done
> this in the first place!
Technically, this isn't the same. The LaTeX block would be removed
during an HTML export while the plain LaTeX code would be changed into
an image (or "Mathjaxified", whatever that means).
That's annoying because I tend to think that writing plain LaTeX
environments (without any block marker) should be deprecated.
Indeed, while there's a need for short mathematical LaTeX snippets,
LaTeX environments can imply constructs that :
- are not always related to mathematics (and should therefore be
handled by Org blocks)
- are too large to be called "snippets" (and should therefore be
handled by Org blocks)
Also, I don't know what to think about an object that you can inline on
the right side but not on the left one (and I admit that's what annoys
me the most, at the moment).
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
