Re: reference formatting

[Hans van der Meer <hansm@science.uva.nl>]

On Jun 22, 2006, at 23:13, Aditya Mahajan wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Hans van der Meer wrote:
>
>> With \definereferenceformat[pin][left=(,right=)] it is possible to  
>> typeset
>> references with
>> 	\pin[ref] and get "(ref)"
>>
>> I have two questions in this respect:
>>
>> 1. is it possible to change the general setup in the same way,
>> 	e.g. let \in[ref] do the same as \pin[ref] here.
>> 	The left and right are not in setupreferencing.
>

I finally came up with this, a bit of a kludge I admit:
\let\originalin=\in
\definereferenceformat[parenthesizedin][left=(,right=),command= 
\originalin]
\let\in=\parenthesizedin

>
> Don't know about this.
>
>> 2. some strange interchange takes place when using \pin{A}{B}[ref].
>> 	Instead of the expected "A (ref) B" one gets "A (refB);
>> 	it therefore seems the right parenthesis from the setup comes too
>> late in play.
>
> As I understand referencing, this is the expected behaviour. I think
> that \in{..}{..}[...] was for things like
>
> As seen in \in{Figure}{a}[fig]...
>
> that is when you want to refer to a subfigure (or a subformula).  
> That is
> why there is no space between the number and the content in the second
> {..}
>

I has not understood it that way, but thought it was meant to enclose  
the whole reference. I see the point now.

Hans van der Meer