Re: displaymath vs. equation
> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> From the Revtex docs (3.1, but I doubt they've changed): Amir> "The most common (and preferred) type of displayed equation in Amir> The APS Journals in a *single-line equation, with an equation Amir> number on the same line*. Try to set as many equations as you Amir> can in this way." (emphasis theirs). I see, just a physicist thing. Are you paid by the number of equations you write down? In this case, the numbering would be indeed useful. JMarc
Re: displaymath vs. equation
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 05:31:40PM +0100, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote: > > >>While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind > >>files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For > >>example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc > >>where it's mentioned? > >> > > Chapter 4 of the Reference. > In fact, I wanted to build an inverse file (list of function and associated > bindings with french translations but I ended with an html version of > this 4th chapter (which can be indexed with the rest of the doc). Well, it is mentioned there, but it doesn't say there what ~S means either. And I think it really belongs in Customization, no? We definitely need to start a LyX Inc. company so we can hire someone to finish the Reference! -Amir
Re: displaymath vs. equation
>>Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:55:13 -0500 >>From: Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>To: Lyx Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Subject: Re: displaymath vs. equation >> >> >>While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind >>files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For >>example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc >>where it's mentioned? >> >>-Amir Chapter 4 of the Reference. In fact, I wanted to build an inverse file (list of function and associated bindings with french translations but I ended with an html version of this 4th chapter (which can be indexed with the rest of the doc). -- Jean-Pierre
Re: displaymath vs. equation
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 04:34:21PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Why would you like to number every single equation when you will not > refer to them? Just for the pleasure to have an equation numbered > (4.5.103)? I even wrote a packages which suppresses numbering of > equations when the equation is not referred to :) >From the Revtex docs (3.1, but I doubt they've changed): "The most common (and preferred) type of displayed equation in The APS Journals in a *single-line equation, with an equation number on the same line*. Try to set as many equations as you can in this way." (emphasis theirs). They do tell you about \[, but don't seem to encourage it. I can't tell you *why* it's done that way, but AFAICT all the chem/phys/bio journal papers I've looked at number all equations. As well as the two theses I've got on my desk. > Try the new command-sequence. Something like > > \bind "M-m e" "command-sequence math-mode ; math-number ;" Ah! Neat idea! I'll see how it goes. Speaking of math-bind, the current math.bind has: \bind "M-m ~S-period" "accent-dot" But when I hit shift-period, I get a ">", and so I get \bind "M-m ~S-greater" "math-delim rangle langle" Why not bind to "M-m period"? While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc where it's mentioned? -Amir
Re: displaymath vs. equation
> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Amir> Are you telling me that every person who's written their thesis Amir> with LyX has either used that hack or math-number'ed every Amir> single equation in their thesis? I'll probably have only 30 or Amir> so, but some theses have hundreds! Why would you like to number every single equation when you will not refer to them? Just for the pleasure to have an equation numbered (4.5.103)? I even wrote a packages which suppresses numbering of equations when the equation is not referred to :) Amir> On the other hand, I just looked at math.bind and found out I Amir> can use "M-m n" to number an equation, so it's not so painful Amir> after all. Nonetheless, there ought to be a command & Amir> corresponding binding that automatically opens an equation Amir> instead of a displaymath (e.g., "M-m e" = "M-m d" + "M-m n"). Of Amir> course I ought to do it myself. I guess I'm just too lazy. But Try the new command-sequence. Something like \bind "M-m e" "command-sequence math-mode ; math-number ;" JMarc
Re: displaymath vs. equation
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:34:06PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> If you add a number to your equations, I guess you mean a label too?
Well, I don't need every equation to have a unique \ref, but yes, I want
them to be numbered 1.1, 1.2, etc.
> In this case it will be \begin{equation}. Otherwise, if you feel like
> to cheat latex, you can try something like the following in the
> preamble:
>
> \renewcommand\[{\begin{equation}}
> \renewcommand\]{\end{equation}}
Are you telling me that every person who's written their thesis with LyX has
either used that hack or math-number'ed every single equation in their
thesis? I'll probably have only 30 or so, but some theses have hundreds!
On the other hand, I just looked at math.bind and found out I can use
"M-m n" to number an equation, so it's not so painful after all.
Nonetheless, there ought to be a command & corresponding binding that
automatically opens an equation instead of a displaymath
(e.g., "M-m e" = "M-m d" + "M-m n"). Of course I ought to do it myself. I
guess I'm just too lazy. But if Dekel is working on putting math-number in
the menu, maybe he could do this on the side?
-Amir
Re: displaymath vs. equation
> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Amir> Dumb question. Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer
Amir> for every single equation in my whole document? (Or use a perl
Amir> script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?) I can't imagine that's
Amir> the case. I know a bunch of people have written their theses in
Amir> lyx already. So what's the secret to having all of your
Amir> equations numbered?
If you add a number to your equations, I guess you mean a label too?
In this case it will be \begin{equation}. Otherwise, if you feel like
to cheat latex, you can try something like the following in the
preamble:
\renewcommand\[{\begin{equation}}
\renewcommand\]{\end{equation}}
JMarc
displaymath vs. equation
Dumb question.
Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer for every single equation in
my whole document? (Or use a perl script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?)
I can't imagine that's the case. I know a bunch of people have written their
theses in lyx already. So what's the secret to having all of your equations
numbered?
-Amir
