From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/180 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Taco Hoekwater Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: ConTeXt: math formulars + framed/grey background Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1998 17:16:30 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time) Sender: owner-ntg-context@let.uu.nl Message-ID: <13864.46286.810000.668546@PC709> References: <36278112.DD587C03@wxs.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035391049 21838 80.91.224.250 (23 Oct 2002 16:37:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 16:37:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tobias Burnus , ntg-context@ntg.nl Original-To: Hans Hagen In-Reply-To: <36278112.DD587C03@wxs.nl> Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:180 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:180 >>>>> "HH" == Hans Hagen writes: >> BTW: How to type matrices? HH> Rather plain I suppose. Always use the plain TeX approach, it should all work. >> PS: Disscussion point: should we offer \sqrt[n]{x} as LaTeX does, >> or should we stick to plain ( \root n\of x ) HH> Taco, what's your opinion on this? The in-line method might become deprecated with the advent of NTS, so I favour the prefix style. Same for \over, \atop etc. These inline primitives create some nasty problems with internally `undecided` subformulas. Some hard work is done on trying to remove them (since that would consequently allow in-formula \fam switching). So definately a prefix method. Not necesarily the LaTeX syntax though. I'd prefer something like \radical[...=...]{n}{x}. Let me return on this later, OK? Hans, please don't implement anything yet. Greetings, Taco -- Taco Hoekwater taco.hoekwater@wkap.nl Kluwer Academic Publishers -- Pre Press -- Achterom 119, 3311 KB Dordrecht, The Netherlands tel. 31-78-6392550 ---------------------------------------------------------------------