Re: robust \dots command

[Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>]

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 -) 

>\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]

>\DeclareTextCommandDefault{\textellipsis}{%
>   .\kern\fontdimen3\font
>   .\kern\fontdimen3\font
>   .\kern\fontdimen3\font}

\periods[124]

>\def\mathellipsis{\mathinner{\ldotp\ldotp\ldotp}}%
>
>
>The advantage of this definition is, that we can switch easyly to a real 
>ellipsis if the current font has one.

This should be part of the encoding vector, so if someone collects those
... emdash endsh etc are also candidates, although i'm still not sure about
the distinction between what goes into a normal text font and what not, but
the default handler can catch it. 

So, go ahead and collect symbols and they will be added, 

Hans 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl
                      Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
 tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------