You wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As discussed in a recent thread[fn:1], \[...\] constructs are
> counter-intuitive to some users.
>
> At the time being, \[...\] are inline-able. As a consequence, they are
> can be written in the middle of a line, and filled, much like \(...\).
> Even though it is also possible to inline them in a LaTeX document, the
> intent is to make them stand out in their own lines.
>
> The current proposal is to make them elements instead of objects in Org
> syntax (i.e, a `latex-environment' instead of a `latex-fragment'). In
> a nutshell:
>
> - Pros:
> + conform to LaTeX intent,
> + impossible to fill.
> - Cons:
> - documents containing \[...\] mid-line will be broken (such
> constructs will not be recognized anymore).
>
> WDYT?
>
> Regards,
>
> [fn:1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/88882
Hello,
I often use \[...\] to write maths fragments that constitute grammatical
units of a plain sentence, yet are better read on their own line when
rendered, as in \[x = \mathit{some~complex~stuff} \mbox{ and}\] \[y =
\mathit{more~complex~stuff}\] where \(\mathit{stuff} =
\mathit{less~intricate~stuff}\).
(Recall that LaTeX is in principle intended to allow focusing on
contents instead of formatting, some LaTeX packages may also change the
behavior of \[...\] I think).
Also note that MathJax automatically adds "<div>"s when it encounters
such constructs in paragraphs like "<p>...\[...\]...</p>", and those
<div>s can still further be customized with CSS ; what would be the
result of exporting to HTML if they were not inline?.
As it is always possible to use displaymath environments, I don't think
any change regarding \[...\] is necessary.
Regards,
N.
--
Nicolas Berthier FSF Member #7975
