Re: [O] plus in superscript.
suvayu ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Nick,
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Nick Dokos nicholas.do...@hp.com wrote:
* This is a test: \(T^{+}\)
Apart from what Christian said, do you have any comments about $..$
and \(..\) ? I hear conflicting arguments about which is preferred
(e.g. $..$ is a TeX construct where as \(..\) is a LaTeX macro arguing
in favour of $..$). Specially an opinion in the context of org -
latex export would be interesting to hear.
As far as LaTeX is concerned, I believe that $...$ and \(...\) are
entirely equivalent (but you have to use \[...\], and not $$...$$ for
displayed material). That's from reading Lamport's book: sec 3.3 and
Appendix E (the Miscellaneous section); I have not checked the code.
I prefer \(...\) and (iirc) sometimes that has worked when $...$ has
not, but I don't remember the context; afaik those (rare) situations
were deemed to be bugs in the exporter and have all been fixed.
Nick
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
Hi,
$...$ may sometimes get confused with currency signs, variable names
and whatnot.
Org-mode is sophisticated about it as long as you follow a few
safeguards -- from the Info section 11.7.3:
To avoid conflicts
with currency specifications, single `$' characters are only
recognized as math delimiters if the enclosed text contains at
most two line breaks, is directly attached to the `$' characters
with no whitespace in between, and if the closing `$' is followed
by whitespace, punctuation or a dash. For the other delimiters,
there is no such restriction, so when in doubt, use `\(...\)' as
inline math delimiters.
But note that MathJax, the preferred backend for math in Org's HTML
exports, does not support $...$ by default. To configure it, see:
http://www.mathjax.org/docs/1.1/tex.html#tex-and-latex-math-delimiters
Yours,
Christian
On 9/15/11 9:19 AM, Nick Dokos wrote:
suvayu alifatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Nick,
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Nick Dokosnicholas.do...@hp.com wrote:
* This is a test: \(T^{+}\)
Apart from what Christian said, do you have any comments about $..$
and \(..\) ? I hear conflicting arguments about which is preferred
(e.g. $..$ is a TeX construct where as \(..\) is a LaTeX macro arguing
in favour of $..$). Specially an opinion in the context of org -
latex export would be interesting to hear.
As far as LaTeX is concerned, I believe that $...$ and \(...\) are
entirely equivalent (but you have to use \[...\], and not $$...$$ for
displayed material). That's from reading Lamport's book: sec 3.3 and
Appendix E (the Miscellaneous section); I have not checked the code.
I prefer \(...\) and (iirc) sometimes that has worked when $...$ has
not, but I don't remember the context; afaik those (rare) situations
were deemed to be bugs in the exporter and have all been fixed.
Nick
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
On Sep 15, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Christian Moe wrote: Hi, $...$ may sometimes get confused with currency signs, variable names and whatnot. Org-mode is sophisticated about it as long as you follow a few safeguards -- from the Info section 11.7.3: To avoid conflicts with currency specifications, single `$' characters are only recognized as math delimiters if the enclosed text contains at most two line breaks, is directly attached to the `$' characters with no whitespace in between, and if the closing `$' is followed by whitespace, punctuation or a dash. For the other delimiters, there is no such restriction, so when in doubt, use `\(...\)' as inline math delimiters. But note that MathJax, the preferred backend for math in Org's HTML exports, does not support $...$ by default. To configure it, see: http://www.mathjax.org/docs/1.1/tex.html#tex-and-latex-math-delimiters When Org exports to HTML for use with MathJax, it does convert $..$ to \(..\) to work around this. Still, parsing $...$ is much harder than parsing \(..\), so most of the time, using \(//\) will give better and more stable results with Org-mode. - Carsten
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
On 9/15/11 9:44 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote: When Org exports to HTML for use with MathJax, it does convert $..$ to \(..\) to work around this. Oops, I should have guessed. I just remembered having to fiddle with my MathJax configuration at one point, but that was probably before Org even switched from dvipng to MathJax as default. Still, parsing $...$ is much harder than parsing \(..\), so most of the time, using \(//\) will give better and more stable results with Org-mode. And a good deal more readable. Christian
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
Piter_ x.pi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all. I try to put a superscript in org-mode in this way: T^{+}. But
it gets exported in latex as $^{\st{}$. Any idea how to avoid it?
Thanks.
{Super,sub}scripts are latex math constructs - try the following:
--8---cut here---start-8---
* This is a test: \(T^{+}\)
And inline: \(T^{+}\) and displayed: \[T^{+}\]
--8---cut here---end---8---
Nick
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
But latex subscripts/superscripts should work in Org even without an
explicit math environment, and they do for me -- exporting Piter's
T^{+} gives me
T$^{+}$
as expected. Something in his setup?
Yours,
Christian
On 9/14/11 6:55 PM, Nick Dokos wrote:
Piter_x.pi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all. I try to put a superscript in org-mode in this way: T^{+}. But
it gets exported in latex as $^{\st{}$. Any idea how to avoid it?
Thanks.
{Super,sub}scripts are latex math constructs - try the following:
--8---cut here---start-8---
* This is a test: \(T^{+}\)
And inline: \(T^{+}\) and displayed: \[T^{+}\]
--8---cut here---end---8---
Nick
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
Christian Moe m...@christianmoe.com wrote:
But latex subscripts/superscripts should work in Org even without an
explicit math environment, and they do for me -- exporting Piter's
T^{+} gives me
T$^{+}$
as expected. Something in his setup?
You are right - sorry about the noise.
Nick
Re: [O] plus in superscript.
Hi Nick,
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Nick Dokos nicholas.do...@hp.com wrote:
* This is a test: \(T^{+}\)
Apart from what Christian said, do you have any comments about $..$
and \(..\) ? I hear conflicting arguments about which is preferred
(e.g. $..$ is a TeX construct where as \(..\) is a LaTeX macro arguing
in favour of $..$). Specially an opinion in the context of org -
latex export would be interesting to hear.
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
