Thursday, September 18, 2003 Hans Hagen wrote: > yes, but a very short last line will make uit look quite ugly, i.e. there > is already quite some space there; i'd rather tend to have a different > threshold then (say 4em instead of 2em, which boils down to:
> some long text > formula part of paragraph > some text > formula part of paragraph > some long text > formula not part of paragraph > some text > formula not part of paragraph > so, to let the horizontal distance between end of line text and begin of > text also play a role. actually a very short last time should NOT happen full stop. :) There was a discussion on this recently on c.t.t., about "French" orphans or "Russian" paragraphs. You can look them up with GoogleGroups. To prevent those lines, Donald Arseneau proposes something like \parfillskip = .5\hsize plus .092\hsize minus .5\hsize He says: "This not only prohibits the short final lines, but heavily penalizes moderately short final lines. Another bad feature is that \abovedisplayshortskip will never be used, leading to excessive white space around some formulas." Given that you never use \abovedisplayshortskip, we're safe ;) >> text $$math$$ text >>and >>text\par $$math$$\par text >>are NOT the same thing and should be treated differently! > i know, but that's on the agenda; and even then, i'll add options to > control the look and feel -) > (in practice i think that it also depends on the taste and specific > formula, say x=2 vs x=sqrt(2) may demand their own spacing rules) Don't exaggerate. The human eye is slack enough to give those spacing some tolerance :) -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
