Re: robust \dots command

[Uwe Koloska <uwe.koloska@mailbox.tu-dresden.de>]

Am Montag, 12. März 2001 21:45 hast du geschrieben:
> At 11:52 AM 3/5/01 +0100, Uwe Koloska wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >I suggest to change the definition of \dots to match the one from latex.
> >With the current implementation \dots uses the math \ldots so it is not
> > set in the current font.
> >
> >Latex makes a distinction between \textellipsis and \mathellipsis:
>
> hm, they hardly look like ellipsis -)

Yes, you are right -- but they have the right typeface ;-))

> >\DeclareRobustCommand{\dots}{%
> >   \ifmmode\mathellipsis\else\textellipsis\fi}
>
> I'm more thinking of an extensions to the symbol mechanism that
> understanda math, something:
>
> \definesymbols[class][text][math] as companion to
> \definesymbol[class][text]

How this will be implemented, isn't really important.  We have not only to 
collect symbols, but existing commands (some from plain TeX) that have to 
be changed to the new style.

I am waiting to find a little bit of time, to install the new beta and test 
the new features!

Uwe

-- 
mailto:koloska@rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de
http://rcswww.urz.tu-dresden.de/~koloska/
--                                    --
right now the web page is in german only
but this will change as time goes by ;-)