On Thu, 9 Aug 2012, Steffen Wolfrum wrote:
Hi,
for nice linebreaking we can adjust math formulas by the use of NC, NR
alignment.
But if someone only wants long formulas to fit in a defined area, and want them
to break automatically ... is there a handy solution?
Short answer: No easy solut
Hi,
for nice linebreaking we can adjust math formulas by the use of NC, NR
alignment.
But if someone only wants long formulas to fit in a defined area, and want them
to break automatically ... is there a handy solution?
(Below are examples that don't work)
Thanks,
Steffen
---
\starttext
Dear Aditya,
> \startformula must occur inside a vbox. So, use a matrix environment as you
> are doing, or wrap the formula inside a \framed[align=normal].
>
Thank you for your solution.
\framed[frame=off,align=normal]{\startformula\startalign ...
\stopalign\stopformula}
is wo
\NC y' = \NC \NR
> \stopmatrix \VL \VL \NC\FR
> \HL
> \NC $y$ \VL \startformula\startalign
> \NC x' = \NC \NR
> \NC y' = \NC \NR
> \stopalign\stopformula \VL \VL \NC\LR
> \HL
> \stoptable
> \stoptext
> %%%
\startformula must occ
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Meer, H. van der wrote:
> The space around formula with \placeformula is a bit too large to my
> taste, even in the case of \setupformulae[spaceafter=small]. Because
> setting this to 0pt didn't make much difference, I had to resort to
> spacea
The space around formula with \placeformula is a bit too large to my taste,
even in the case of \setupformulae[spaceafter=small]. Because setting this to
0pt didn't make much difference, I had to resort to spaceafter=-1ex. Why is
there seemingly always such a large space around the formula
e of \expandafter doesn't match its definition.
system > tex > error on line 6 in file demo.context: Use
of ...
1 \starttext
2
3 \startformula \startalign
4 \NC v \NC = u + at \NR
5 \NC h \NC= ut + \frac12 gt^2 \NR
6 >> \stopalign \stopformula
7
8
\par \egroup
\strc_formulas_stop_formula ...native \v!formula }
\dostoptagged
\dostoptagge...
l.4 \stopformula
___
If your question is of interest to others as wel
wmyarrow (1.5cm,0) -- (1.5cm,1cm) withtransparency(1,.5) ;
>>
>> \stopMPpage
>> \stoptext
>>
>> The (-ahlength+.1penscale) are of course empiric. You should find
>> the correct formula to always have a nice match of line and arrow
>> whatever ahl
arrow origin-- (0,1cm) withtransparency(1,.5) ;
> drawmyarrow (1.5cm,0) -- (2.5cm,0) withtransparency(1,.5) ;
> drawmyarrow (1.5cm,0) -- (1.5cm,1cm) withtransparency(1,.5) ;
>
> \stopMPpage
> \stoptext
>
> The (-ahlength+.1penscale) are of course
drawmyarrow (1.5cm,0) -- (1.5cm,1cm) withtransparency(1,.5) ;
\stopMPpage
\stoptext
The (-ahlength+.1penscale) are of course empiric. You should find
the correct formula to always have a nice match of line and arrow
whatever ahlength and ahangle values are
inside the
chemical formula?
Comma character is used as a delimiter of individual items in the
formula.
When is there command for example \lettertilde, is there something like
"\lettercomma (\charcomma)", "\lettersemicolon (\charcomma)" and others
nonalphanumerics characters
On 1-4-2012 15:15, Jaroslav Hajtmar wrote:
Hello all,
Is there a way to use comma character or semicolon character inside the
chemical formula?
Comma character is used as a delimiter of individual items in the formula.
When is there command for example \lettertilde, is there something like
Hello all,
Is there a way to use comma character or semicolon character inside the
chemical formula?
Comma character is used as a delimiter of individual items in the formula.
When is there command for example \lettertilde, is there something like
"\lettercomma (\char
in my prior tests, but changed it to 'round' because of
the very small chance of getting the highest number (at least with my
formula).
Let's hope, nobody has wikified my bad maths;-)
> which gives a uniform weight to all numbers.
Hmm, I absolutely stink at math, but after a fe
Am 15.03.2012 um 15:23 schrieb Procházka Lukáš Ing. - Pontex s. r. o.:
> ... Actually, I'm using \st-formula to center members on the line. Something
> similar to what you get using:
>
> \hbox to\textwidth{\hfil a\hfil b\hfil c\hfil}
>
> I was thinking abo
... Actually, I'm using \st-formula to center members on the line. Something
similar to what you get using:
\hbox to\textwidth{\hfil a\hfil b\hfil c\hfil}
I was thinking about \st-combination, too:
\startcombination[3*1]
{a}
{b}
{c}
\stopcombination
But \st-combin
> In this case, the footnote after "Ccc" doesn't lower next text;
> but "Footnote C" is not listed in the bottom of the page (?).
> So - how to add a footnote to formula scope? Or to avoid it?
Sorry, but in which book did you see footnote in mathematical formula
Footnote C}}
\qquad
Aaa\footnote{Some footnote text}
\qquad
Bbb
\stopformula
\stoptext
In this case, the footnote after "Ccc" doesn't lower next text;
but "Footnote C" is not listed in the bottom of the page (?).
So - how to add a footnote to formula s
' because of
the very small chance of getting the highest number (at least with my
formula).
Let's hope, nobody has wikified my bad maths;-)
> which gives a uniform weight to all numbers.
Hmm, I absolutely stink at math, but after a few days of testing: the
"randomness&
>> n:= round(uniformdeviate(nofpics-1)+1);
>
> Actually, round (uniformdeviate(nopics-1)) does not give equal weightage
> to 1 and nofpics. A better solution is
>
> n:= floor(uniformdeviate(nofpics)) + 1;
>
:-)
I used 'floor' in
It doesn't result in a neat formula, but there only appears: "3 ab cd".
Is there a module I have to include? or what else?
\usemodule[mathml]
Hans van der Meer
___
If your question is of int
I ventured a first try of mathml in my code, but clearly I am doing something
wrong.
One of the examples in the XML-publication is:
3
ab
cd
It doesn't result in a neat fo
formats, a formula is included as an image, which means that it
automatically resizes. This means that formulas may be of all different
sized fonts, which gives the result a very scrappy look. At least PDF -
even if not designed for ebook reading - provides decent layout.
The problem is not just
Am 24.02.2012 um 10:09 schrieb Jean-Philippe Rey:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I have a problem with formula numbering in relation with a customized section
> conversion set. I am using ConTeXt current
>
> ConTeXt ver: 2011.05.18 18:04 MKIV fmt: 2011.7.31 int: english/engl
Hello everybody,
I have a problem with formula numbering in relation with a customized section
conversion set. I am using ConTeXt current
ConTeXt ver: 2011.05.18 18:04 MKIV fmt: 2011.7.31 int: english/english
Here is a minimal example
\definestructureconversionset[CCS][numbers,Character
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Wolfgang Schuster
wrote:
>
> Am 25.01.2012 um 07:13 schrieb Peter Park Nelson:
>
>> I have a layout using a columset and grid. When I insert a formula
>> into a column of text, the text following the formula is not snapped
>> to the grid
Am 25.01.2012 um 07:13 schrieb Peter Park Nelson:
> I have a layout using a columset and grid. When I insert a formula
> into a column of text, the text following the formula is not snapped
> to the grid, and the next paragraph is not indented. How can I make
> the text return to th
I have a layout using a columset and grid. When I insert a formula
into a column of text, the text following the formula is not snapped
to the grid, and the next paragraph is not indented. How can I make
the text return to the grid after a formula? And have normal paragraph
indentation?
\input
ined control sequence.
> \doconvertedstructurecounter
> [\v!formula ][]
This is already fixed.
mtx-context | current version: 2012.01.24 18:49
Wolfgang
___
If your
[\v!formula ][]
\flushbothlabelclass #1#2#3->#1#3
#2
...spaces \doplacecurrentformulanumber
\removeunwantedspaces
\dos...
\flushbothlabelclass #1#2#3->#1#3
[\v!formula ][]
\flushbothlabelclass #1#2#3->#1#3
#2
...spaces \doplacecurrentformulanumber
\removeunwantedspaces \dos...
\flushbothlabelclass #1#2#3-&g
, and also, what is the use/necessity of "\endgraf" ?
\starttext
\subsubject{List of Formulas}\placelist[formula][criterium=text,alternative=c]
\subsubject{Formulas}\placenamedformula[one]{First listed Formula}\startformula
a = 1 \stopformula \endgraf
\placeformula\startformula a = 2 \
ith readable formulas.
At least for formulae, it would probably be cheaper and more flexible
to use a graphics tablet or tablet computer, and something like the
Freehand Formula Entry System: http://research.cs.queensu.ca/drl/ffes/
. There is also http://jequation.sourceforge.net/ and JMathNotes (
http:
write your notes and save it. Nowadays I use xournal to write
Lecture-Journals at the internet, that because of the fact that formulas
are easier written by hand than that you have to code them at a
certain way. But I will never call such a formula at the screen and
than tell to the people what they ha
t drawing biochemical formula live, with a piece of chalk, is (even)
more challenging, more fun -- and better for the students.
Cheers, Jörg
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to
to use them to plot a line with gnuplot.
> >
> > Having several of those files I want to use Lua to create the formula
> > for the line for me.
> >
> > I have not yet figured out how to read values from a file in Lua and
> > just tried to print a constant to the gnuplo
On 12-12-2011 22:39, Paul Menzel wrote:
Dear ConTeXt folks,
I have two coefficients saved in a text file
-0.157737135681261
-0.211443105668896
and I want to use them to plot a line with gnuplot.
Having several of those files I want to use Lua to create the formula
for the
files I want to use Lua to create the formula
> for the line for me.
>
> I have not yet figured out how to read values from a file in Lua and
> just tried to print a constant to the gnuplot command.
>
> I tried the following.
>
> \usemodule[gnuplot]
>
> \s
Dear ConTeXt folks,
I have two coefficients saved in a text file
-0.157737135681261
-0.211443105668896
and I want to use them to plot a line with gnuplot.
Having several of those files I want to use Lua to create the formula
for the line for me.
I have not yet figured out how
referenceprefix=\annotationparameter{prefix}]}%
\resetnumber[formula]
\textrule{#1}%
\startframedtext[width=\textwidth,frame=off,leftframe=on]%
#2%
\stopframedtext}
\defineannotation
[Exo]
[alternative=command,
command=\ExoSetup,
text=Exercise ,
number=yes,
he
[annotation] % Wolfgang's module
\define[2]\ExoSetup
{\resetnumber[formula]
\setupframedtext[
width=\textwidth,
frame=off,
leftframe=on]
\textrule{#1}%
\startframedtext
#2%
\stopframe
$(a=b)^{2n} = a^{2n} + b^{2n}$.
>
> \blank[big]
> \hrule
> \blank[big]
>
> Exercice 2. Prove that for any integer $n$
> \resetnumber[formula]
> %\reset[formulas][references]
> \placeformula[eq:2] % I would like the reference to be [eq:1]
> \startformula
> (\cos(x) + {\r
\starttext
Exercice 1. Prove that if $ab=ba$ and $2ab=0$ then
\placeformula[eq:1]
\startformula
(a+b)^2 = a^2 + b^2.
\stopformula
Using the identity (\in[eq:1]) prove that $(a=b)^{2n} = a^{2n} + b^{2n}$.
\blank[big]
\hrule
\blank[big]
Exercice 2. Prove that for any integer $n$
\resetnumber[formula
I have in mind is to number all formula consecutively with
> (chapternumber.1), chapternumber.2) etc. Regardless whether I want to
> reference some of the equations later on and some can stay without a
> reference because that is not needed. Nevertheless, the ascending numbering
).
Why is this? What I have in mind is to number all formula consecutively with
(chapternumber.1), chapternumber.2) etc. Regardless whether I want to reference
some of the equations later on and some can stay without a reference because
that is not needed. Nevertheless, the ascending numbering
;
> I replied to the original thread, but no reply of that so far.
>
> Am I the only one that has the problem not getting
> %%% Start example
> \definereferenceformat[eqref][left={(},right={)}]
>
> \starttext
> \placeformula[eq:gamma]
> \startformula
> \Gamma(n+1)
>>
>> To be more precise, I mean the following situation:
>>
>> \starttext
>>
>> Euler says
>> \placeformula
>> \startformula
>> {\rm e}^{{\rm i} \pi} + 1 = 0.
>> \stopformula
>> The
I replied to the original thread, but no reply of that so far.
Am I the only one that has the problem not getting
%%% Start example
\definereferenceformat[eqref][left={(},right={)}]
\starttext
\placeformula[eq:gamma]
\startformula
\Gamma(n+1)=n!
\stopformula
The fundamental formula~\eqref
> \stopformula
> The above formula will have number (1). Euler's formula is the same as the
> following
> \placeformula
> \startformula
> {\rm e}^{{\rm i} \pi} = - 1.
> \stopformula
> The above formula will have number (2), but fo
Hi,
Is it possible to reset the numbers which appear after invoking \placeformula?
To be more precise, I mean the following situation:
\starttext
Euler says
\placeformula
\startformula
{\rm e}^{{\rm i} \pi} + 1 = 0.
\stopformula
The above formula will
Dear Paul,
this used to work:
%%% Start example
\definereferenceformat[eqref][left={(},right={)}]
\starttext
\placeformula[eq:gamma]
\startformula
\Gamma(n+1)=n!
\stopformula
The fundamental formula~\eqref[eq:gamma]\ldots.
\stoptext
%%% Stop example
But with the latest minimals it does not. It
I find that the placement of an equation number makes a difference on the
amount of white after the equation. Should they both give the same amount of
whitespace? Or is the difference intentional? But then why?
I add a minimal example.
Hans van der Meer
% Test white after formula with and
;s also true for yesterdays beta.
>>
>> I’m aware of this but I hadn’t time so far to write a fix for this.
>
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> still no fix?
>
> \starttext
> \placeformula[eq:1]
> \startformula a+b \stopformula
> \in{Equation:}[eq:1]
> \stoptext
Whe
Am 05.11.2011 um 16:12 schrieb Meer, H. van der:
> I find I get a fairly large whitespace after the formulas placed with:
> \placeformula\startformula <> \stopformula
> How can I reduce this? The wiki does not give a parameter description for
> \setupformulas. In the code I can only find some
I find I get a fairly large whitespace after the formulas placed with:
\placeformula\startformula <> \stopformula
How can I reduce this? The wiki does not give a parameter description for
\setupformulas. In the code I can only find some [distance=] parameter. But
using it with for example \set
ified. (Although without explanations, just an example)
>
>
> I can also provide the entry from my command reference (no yet in the PDF):
>
> \setupreferencestructureprefix[.1.][.2.][..,.3.,..]
> optional
>
> 1. IDENTIFIER (float, formula, figure,
reference (no yet in the PDF):
\setupreferencestructureprefix[.1.][.2.][..,.3.,..]
optional
1. IDENTIFIER (float, formula, figure, SECTION (e.g. section, subsection, …), …)
2. number, page, title, text or default
3. prefix = yes (default), no
prefixse
I get the impression there is something wrong with typesetting math with the
lucida setup in ConTeXt. I find that the \colon is not printed. Below is a
minimal example. See the colon in the first formula that is absent in the
second.
Perhaps someone is willing to check if this is ConTeXt in
the mathe formula show
incorretly.
the minimual example likes below:
\starttext
\startformula
\int_0^\infty t^4 e^{-t}\.dt = 24
\stopformula
\stoptext
when I open the pdf file no matter using evince or adobe reader 9, I
find the index
of the integral cover the integral symbol.
Is it a
Am 05.08.2011 um 15:51 schrieb Jean Magnan de Bornier:
> Here are the four files. This time it is the formula lacking the prefix.
For the moment replace “number=no” with “incrementnumber=no”.
Wolfgang
___
If y
(real not test) I have
| > this:
| >
| > \setuphead[subsection][number=no]
| >
| > whenever a formula or picture is within a subsection the prefix disappears
| > all over, so the "number=no" is not just for how things look (as I
| > believed), it has deeper effects.
&
[number=no]
>
> whenever a formula or picture is within a subsection the prefix disappears
> all over, so the "number=no" is not just for how things look (as I
> believed), it has deeper effects.
C
produce in
the chemical formula environment.
I know that the chemic module is already integrated in the ConTeXt MKIV but I
just can't seem to do chemical typesetting the way I used to using the 2010
MacTeX distribution.
Any help would be greatly appre
Le 04 août à 19:17:55 Jean Magnan de Bornier écrit
notamment:
| Let me search again :(
Here is what I found now. In my environment file (real not test) I have
this:
\setuphead[subsection][number=no]
whenever a formula or picture is within a subsection the prefix disappears
all over, so the
r]
| \setupformulae[way=bysection,prefixsegments=section]
>
| You use for the formula the section number as prefix while floats use
chapters.
>
| In your example there had been section but no chapter and therefore
| you get a prefix for formulas but none for floats.
Wolfgang, thank you for y
eXt took “\chapter{…}” as argument for the component title.
>
> Right, my mistake!
>
> However, with such mistake we have a prefix for formulas anyway!
\setupcaptions[way=bysection,prefixsegments=chapter]
\setupformulae[way=bysection,prefixsegments=section]
You use for the formul
As the example below shows, \mframed part of the formula is placed too
high. I found that \inmframed helps, but my question is: does
\inmframed alter spacing? In other words: does $...whatever...$ look
the same as $...\inmframed[frame=off]{whatever}...$?
\starttext
$E=\mframed{mc^2}$ % wrong
$E
On 24.07.2011, at 16:37, Paul Menzel wrote:
> What is wrong with the way I am looking at this?
Nothing; the reasons are historical. When defining "left" and "right", the
author thought of "raggedleft" (the text is ragged on the left) instead of
"flushleft".
To avoid confusion, you may want to
Dear ConTeXt folks,
looking at the Wiki page about changing the formula alignment [1] and
testing the following minimal example, which is also attached, I would
have thought that `align=right` would mean, that the formula is put to
the right side. But is aligned to the left side instead.
--- 8
Hello,
Is it possible (using ConTeXt MKII) to put a frame
(and/or other highlighters) around an aligned multiline
formula, and also around a single line of this equation array?
(The equation number should align correctly outside the frame.)
\mframed within an alignment seems to refuse the job
h \NR[+][b]
\NC \NC \eq i \NR
\stopalign \stopformula
\stoptext
But the subformula ...[+][a] and ...[+][b] are not shown as expected...
they are shown as normal formula numbers - but they should be
subformula numbers.
Is there a new way to create subformulas
gt;
> --- 8< --- minimal example --- >8 ---
> \starttext
> The famous result (and again) is given by
> \placeformula[formulalabel]
> \startformula
> c^2 = a^2 + b^2.
> \stopformula
> And now we can refer to formula \ref[formulalabel] (ref).
> And now we can refer t
t;
> --- 8< --- minimal example --- >8 ---
> \starttext
> The famous result (and again) is given by
> \placeformula[formulalabel]
> \startformula
> c^2 = a^2 + b^2.
> \stopformula
> And now we can refer to formula \ref[formulalabel] (ref).
> And now we can ref
ven by
\placeformula[formulalabel]
\startformula
c^2 = a^2 + b^2.
\stopformula
And now we can refer to formula \ref[formulalabel] (ref).
And now we can refer to formula \in[formulalabel] (in).
\stoptext
--- 8< --- minimal example --- >8 ---
`\ref` does not seem to find the label for the equation. `\i
Am 20.06.2011 um 15:47 schrieb Reviczky, Adam:
>> So what would be the correct way to do this then?
>
> Right, so is this ok, or is there a better way?
\asciimode but you’re no longer able to add comments to your document
and for inline math you need \formula{…
opparagraph
53
54 \startdescription {Ward} \input ward \stopdescription
55
56 \startdescription {Tufte} \input tufte \stopdescription
57
58 \startparagraph \input knuth (Knuth) \stopparagraph
59
60 \startformula
61 e = mc^2
62 >> \stopformula
63
64
with \startcombination does not work correctly.
Best regards: OK
steps-formula-1.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
On 14 mai 2011, at 03:11, Jeong Dalyoung wrote:
> Dear Wolfgang and Otared,
>
> Thank you for the reply.
>
> I have used \setupinteraction[state=start] and open with Ado
it also to this message.
The old « raw steps » is handy when one may need to go backward in the steps or
when you want to show, say, the third line of your formula before the second
line, but it has the disadvantage of creating one page per step.
\starttext
\setuppapersize[S6][S6
Am 13.05.2011 um 02:13 schrieb Jeong Dalyoung:
> Dear all,
>
> I'd like to show the following formula line by line in a presentation,
> For example,
> \startformula\startalign
> \NC T(4) \NC = T(3) + 4 \NR
> \NC \NC= T(2) + 3 + 4 \NR
> \NC \NC= T(1) + 2 + 3 + 4
Dear all,
I'd like to show the following formula line by line in a presentation,
For example,
\startformula\startalign
\NC T(4) \NC = T(3) + 4 \NR
\NC \NC= T(2) + 3 + 4 \NR
\NC \NC= T(1) + 2 + 3 + 4 \NR
\NC \NC= 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10 \NR
\stopalign\stopformula
I tried to use \StartStep
thank you Hans and Luigi for the clarification
2011/5/12 luigi scarso
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
> > On 12-5-2011 2:05, Julian Becker wrote:
> >>
> >> just realized: is it perhaps that in the first case, the square brackets
> >> are
> >> interpreted as a list of param
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
> On 12-5-2011 2:05, Julian Becker wrote:
>>
>> just realized: is it perhaps that in the first case, the square brackets
>> are
>> interpreted as a list of parameters to \startformula?
>
> indeed, so add \relax after \startformula
or use
\left[ an
On 12-5-2011 2:05, Julian Becker wrote:
just realized: is it perhaps that in the first case, the square brackets are
interpreted as a list of parameters to \startformula?
indeed, so add \relax after \startformula
-
ttext
> This formula produces an error:
> \startformula
> [r_{\rm test}]=a
> \stopformula
> \stoptext
> \starttext
> However, this works:
> \startformula
> a=[r_{\rm test}]
> \stopformula
>
> What's going on here? Using \mathrm instead of \rm in the subscript is
I just found out that I cannot (with MkIV on Windows XP, ConTeXt ver.
2011.02.09 16:42) compile the following
\starttext
This formula produces an error:
\startformula
[r_{\rm test}]=a
\stopformula
\stoptext
\starttext
However, this works:
\startformula
a=[r_{\rm test}]
\stopformula
What's
nit{\groupedcommand{\rm\ }{}}
>
> or
>
> \def\unit#1{\bgroup\rm\ #1\egroup}
>
> { and } are same as \begingroup and \endgroup in math mode and prevent and a
> line break of the content.
Wow! Interesting. I never realized that {} prevents breaking in math mode.
However, your
Thank you alot Aditya! Somehow I didn't even think about using subsubjects
instead of subsections. I guess it was too obvious a solution.
best regards,
Julian
2011/5/9 Aditya Mahajan
> On Wed, 4 May 2011, Julian Becker wrote:
>
> I came across the following problem recently: In my document I w
On Wed, 4 May 2011, Julian Becker wrote:
I came across the following problem recently: In my document I want chapters
and sections to be numbered, but not subsections, subsubsections etc.
Then, additionally I want my formulae to be numbered by chapter and section,
but not subsection.
In the fol
hould give text between formulas
\startformula
\startalign
\NC \exp^{\imath t}=\cos t+\imath\sin t\NR
\startintertext
This is famous Euler formula, below one is known as Moivre formula
\stopintertext
\NC (\cos x + \imath\sin x)^{m} = \cos mx+\imath\sin mx \NR
\stopalign
\stopformula
ow to accomplish this?
Thanks,
Julian
-
\setuphead[subsection][number=no]
\setupnumber[formula][key=chapter]
\starttext
\chapter{Wake up}
\placeformula
\startformula a^2+b^2=c^2
\stopformula
\section{Make Coffee}
\placeformula
\startformula c^2+d^2=e^2
\stopformula
\subsectio
gt; and mine below.
>
> \setupbodyfont[pagella]
> \starttext
> \formula{A_1+\cdots+A_N}\par
> \formula{A_1+⋯+A_N}
> \stoptext
That is correct.
I think the AMS introduced `\dotsb` to separate the content and the
markup, since some publishers use the lower dots »…« and not the
cen
mathalign.pdf
> >>%%% (MyWay).
> >>
> >>\starttext
> >>
> >>Here the start/stopintertext should give text between formulas
> >>\startformula
> >> \startalign
> >> \NC \exp^{\imath t}=\cos t+\imath\sin t\NR
> >> \starti
Am 03.05.2011 um 15:46 schrieb Paul Menzel:
> Dear ConTeXt folks,
>
>
> `\dotsb` is not defined although it is defined in AMSTeX (amsmath) [1].
Why don’t you use \cdots, i can see no difference between your linked example
and mine below.
\setupbodyfont[pagella]
\starttext
How can I typeset an augmented matrix, that is, a matrix where some columns
are separated by a vertical line? "\VL" doesn't seem to work within a
formula.
Thanks very much!
cheers,
Alasdair
--
Blog: http://amca01.wordpress.com
Web: http://bit.ly/Alasdair
Facebook: http://w
Sorted it - turns out I inadvertently used the same label for a formula and
a figure. I've made all my labels distinct and the problem has gone. Sorry
for wasting your bandwidth.
-Alasdair
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2011, Alasdair McAndr
sion 2011.02.15 16:11)
Also, it seems odd that adding a negative space \neghairspace does not
change the length of the total formula - I had expected the modified one
to be slightly shorter...?
I don't know about this.
On a related issue, the spacing for lists, e.g. (0,0,...,0), is not
sat
t adding a negative space \neghairspace does not
change the length of the total formula - I had expected the modified one
to be slightly shorter...?
I don't know about this.
On a related issue, the spacing for lists, e.g. (0,0,...,0), is not
satisfactory. LaTeX provides a command \dotsc for dots
matter of taste (inserting a \neghairspace after the X
achieves the latter). In any case, I would kind of prefer equal spacing.
Also, it seems odd that adding a negative space \neghairspace does not
change the length of the total formula - I had expected the modified one
to be slightly shorter
In fact you should say \NR[+] at the end of each line in \startalign in
order to get numbers.
This works for me:
\starttext
\placeformula
\startformula
\startalign
\NC \dot{x}(t) \NC=f(x(t), u(t)) \NR[+]
\NC y(t) \NC=h(x(t), u(t)), \NR[+]
\stopalign
\stopformula
\stoptext
Wow, that's pure magi
601 - 700 of 1347 matches
Mail list logo
