ntg-context - mailing list for ConTeXt users
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* New math feature requests
@ 2006-08-08  5:49 Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-08  5:59 ` Aditya Mahajan
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-08  5:49 UTC (permalink / raw)


Hi Hans and Taco,

I am back with some more math request---one alignment construct, one 
inner math alignment construct, and one formula tagging request. These 
are primarily to "complete" the context math environments. I am 
posting here rather than on the dev list, so that other math users can 
also contribute. This is a loong mail.

1. Multiline equations (they are called multline equations in amsmath)

This is used to write multiline formulas (where alignement does not 
make sense). The first line is left aligned, the last line is 
rightaligned and all the middle lines are middle aligned.

The entire formula gets only one number. If the formulas are numbered 
on the right, then the formula number is located on the last line; if 
the formulas are numbered on the left, then the formula number is 
located on the first line.

The alignment of a single line can be changed.

The first and the last line have a gap equal to \multlinegap from the 
text border. If the formula is numbered, the gap is used only for the 
line without the number.

I do not know what is a good syntax for this command. First of all, I 
think we should call it multiline (rather than multline as in ams). 
Then we can have

\placeformula
\startmultilineformula[gap=5pt]
   \NC f(x) = ax \NR
   \NC + bx + c + \NR
   \NC e \NR
\stopformula

This should come out as (assuming formulas are numbered on the right)

   5pt gap
|---f(x) = ax                | <---- left aligned
|      + bx + c  +           | <---- middle aligned
|                   + e  (1) | <---- right aligned


If the formulas are numbered on the left
|(1) f(x) = ax               |
|       + bx + c +           |
|                      + e---|
                            5pt gap

If there is no placeformula in the front then

|---f(x) = ax                 |<-- left aligned (5pt gap)
|        + bx + c +           |<-- middle aligned
|                       + e---|<-- right aligned with 5pt gap


If should be possible to get the 2nd line right aligned by using

\NC f(x) = ax                \NR
\NC[align=right] + bx + c +  \NR
\NC  +e                      \NR

I am not sure of the syntax and the above \NC...\NR is just to 
illustrate the point.

PS: I do not use multline of amsmath frequently. If someone does use 
it, please read this carefully to ensure that I did not misread the 
manual.


2. In amsmath, most of alignment constructs exist in two forms: outer 
and inner. The mathalignment implemented in core-mat.tex corresponds 
to outer alignment. The inner alignment is same as outer alignment, 
but is only as wide as necessay. The most common amsmath inner 
alignment constructs are aligned and gathered. It is easiest to 
explain by means of an example. Suppose I want to type

   a x + b y = c `\
                   } (simultaneous equations)
   d x + e y = f  /
                 ,

I want to be able to do

\defineinnermathalignment[aligned][n=2,left={\left.},right={\right\}}]

\startformula
   \startaligned
     \NC ax + by \EQ c \NR
     \NC dx + ey \EQ f \NR
   \stopaligned
   \quad \text{(simultaneous equations)}
\stopformula

One crude way to implement this is as follows


\def\startaligned{
   %Whatever corresponds to left=
   \left.
   \framed[align=normal,frame=off,location=lohi]
   % I do not know how to do this in terms of hboxes
   \bgroup
   \vskip-\baselineskip %There should be a better way
   \startformula \startalign[n=2]}

\def\stopaligned{
   \stopalign \stopformula
   \egroup%end of framed
   % Whatever correspons to right=
   \right\}
   }


\startformula
   \startaligned
     \NC ax + by \EQ c \NR
     \NC dx + ey \EQ f \NR
   \stopaligned
   \quad \text{(simultaneous equations)}
\stopformula


I am sure that this definition can be improved. The innermath 
environments should take three types of options 
(n=...,m=....,distance=....,etc, that are passed to \startalign; 
left=...,right=..., that put the left and right delimiters; and 
location=high|low|lohi that align the innermath environment to the 
baseline. Notice that the crude definition that I have given does not 
handle location nicely.

I know Tex's limitation of scaling left and right delimiters on both 
sides of the math centerline, making it difficult to handle left|right 
and location correctly. It there is no easy fix, left|right can be 
left out.

Such a construct will take care of aligned, gathered and split 
environments of amsmath.


3. Formula tagging

amsmath allows formulas to be tagged. I will explain amsmath's 
behaviour and hope that Hans can come up with the context way of doing 
such things.

Occasionally, one wants to tag a formula, e.g.

\placefomrula[a] \startformula
   a x = b
\stopformula

\placetaggedformula[b]{*} \startformula
   x = \frac {b}{a}
\stopformula

should come out as

         a x = b              (1)
         x = b/a              (*)

Notice that ( and ) correspond to left and right in setupformulas. It 
should also be possible to place a tag without these brackets, so

\placetaggedformulawithoutbrackets[c]{**} \startformula
   b = ax
\stopformula

should come out as
        b = ax               ** <--- no brackets here

Maybe, instead of placetaggedformulawithout brackets, one can simply 
have

\placetaggedformula[c][left=,right=]{**}

but in such cases it is easy to get confused with the reference and 
options. I am not sure what is a good way to do this.

It should also be possible to refer to these tagged formulas. So
\in{formula}[b] should give * and \in{formula}[c] should give **.

The tag should be set in text mode, so that one can say
\placetagformula {Answer} and the Answer will come out in text mode.



Thanks,
Aditya

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-08  5:49 New math feature requests Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-08  5:59 ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-08  8:14   ` Hans Hagen
  2006-08-08 14:20 ` Taco Hoekwater
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-08  5:59 UTC (permalink / raw)


On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:

> Hi Hans and Taco,
>
> I am back with some more math request

Forgot a small request: Can this be added to core-mat.tex

\def\intertext#1{\startintertext#1\stopintertext}

Aditya

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-08  5:59 ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-08  8:14   ` Hans Hagen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2006-08-08  8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)


Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi Hans and Taco,
>>
>> I am back with some more math request
>>     
>
> Forgot a small request: Can this be added to core-mat.tex
>
> \def\intertext#1{\startintertext#1\stopintertext}
>   
sure, but as: 

\def\intertext#1%
  {\noalign{\dointertext{#1}}}

(more efficient) 

Hans 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-08  5:49 New math feature requests Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-08  5:59 ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-08 14:20 ` Taco Hoekwater
  2006-08-08 15:38   ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-25  1:34 ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-25  5:15 ` Aditya Mahajan
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Taco Hoekwater @ 2006-08-08 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)




Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> 
> 2. In amsmath, most of alignment constructs exist in two forms: outer 
> and inner. The mathalignment implemented in core-mat.tex corresponds 
> to outer alignment. The inner alignment is same as outer alignment, 
> but is only as wide as necessay. The most common amsmath inner 
> alignment constructs are aligned and gathered. It is easiest to 
> explain by means of an example. Suppose I want to type
> 
>    a x + b y = c `\
>                    } (simultaneous equations)
>    d x + e y = f  /
>                  ,
> 
> I want to be able to do
> 
> \defineinnermathalignment[aligned][n=2,left={\left.},right={\right\}}]

This sounds very close to \definemathmatrix, yes?

Taco

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-08 14:20 ` Taco Hoekwater
@ 2006-08-08 15:38   ` Aditya Mahajan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-08 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)


On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>>
>> 2. In amsmath, most of alignment constructs exist in two forms: outer
>> and inner. The mathalignment implemented in core-mat.tex corresponds
>> to outer alignment. The inner alignment is same as outer alignment,
>> but is only as wide as necessay. The most common amsmath inner
>> alignment constructs are aligned and gathered. It is easiest to
>> explain by means of an example. Suppose I want to type
>>
>>    a x + b y = c `\
>>                    } (simultaneous equations)
>>    d x + e y = f  /
>>                  ,
>>
>> I want to be able to do
>>
>> \defineinnermathalignment[aligned][n=2,left={\left.},right={\right\}}]
>
> This sounds very close to \definemathmatrix, yes?

It is, and my first thought was that this can be achieved using 
\definematrix (that is why the previous requests for location= and 
style=). However, all my attempts to use a matrix failed because:

1. Matrix does not "see" beyond the \NCs as align.

Comapre the output of

\startformula \startalign[n=2]
  \NC a \NC = bx + c \NR
  \NC   \NC + ey \NR
\stopalign \stopformula

with

\startformula \startmatrix[n=2,distance=0pt, style=\displaystyle]
  \NC a \NC = bx + c \NR
  \NC   \NC + ey \NR
\stopmatrix \stopformula

The '+' in the second line comes out as a unary operator rather than a binary
operator. This can be corrected by using \NC{}+ but should the user really
know the ugly implementation details?

2. Matrix does not correct interline space. Compare

\startformula \startalign[n=2]
  \NC f(x) \NC = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \phi(y-x) dy \NR
  \NC      \NC = \sum_{i=-\infty}^{\infty} \hat phi(i-x) \NR
\stopalign \stopformula

with

\startformula \startmatrix[n=2,distance=0pt, style=\displaystyle]
  \NC f(x) \NC = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \phi(y-x) dy \NR
  \NC      \NC = \sum_{i=-\infty}^{\infty} \hat phi(i-x) \NR
\stopmatrix \stopformula

The two lines are too close.

I thought that it might be easier to simply wrap the whole align 
around a hbox as these inner alignments need not break across pages. 
If matrix can be enhanced to take care of the above two requirements 
then matrix is fine. However, if I just want a matrix, then both above 
behaviours of the matrix are correct. I am not sure what kind of 
interface matrix should have to behave in both ways (the current 
matrix behaviour and the requested aligned behaviour).


Aditya

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-08  5:49 New math feature requests Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-08  5:59 ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-08 14:20 ` Taco Hoekwater
@ 2006-08-25  1:34 ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-25  5:15 ` Aditya Mahajan
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-25  1:34 UTC (permalink / raw)


On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> 3. Formula tagging
>
> amsmath allows formulas to be tagged. I will explain amsmath's
> behaviour and hope that Hans can come up with the context way of doing
> such things.
>
> Occasionally, one wants to tag a formula, e.g.
>
> \placefomrula[a] \startformula
>   a x = b
> \stopformula
>
> \placetaggedformula[b]{*} \startformula
>   x = \frac {b}{a}
> \stopformula
>
> should come out as
>
>         a x = b              (1)
>         x = b/a              (*)
>
> Notice that ( and ) correspond to left and right in setupformulas. It
> should also be possible to place a tag without these brackets, so
>
> \placetaggedformulawithoutbrackets[c]{**} \startformula
>   b = ax
> \stopformula
>
> should come out as
>        b = ax               ** <--- no brackets here
>
> Maybe, instead of placetaggedformulawithout brackets, one can simply
> have
>
> \placetaggedformula[c][left=,right=]{**}
>
> but in such cases it is easy to get confused with the reference and
> options. I am not sure what is a good way to do this.
>
> It should also be possible to refer to these tagged formulas. So
> \in{formula}[b] should give * and \in{formula}[c] should give **.
>
> The tag should be set in text mode, so that one can say
> \placetagformula {Answer} and the Answer will come out in text 
mode.

I got an idea of using conversion for formula tagging. For single line 
formulas, the idea is pretty simple. I define a dummyconversion which 
always maps to the tag and set the formula conversion to 
dummyconversion. Then, I save the formula number, let startformula, 
work as normal and refine stopformula to restore formula number. 
The internal macros take care of referencing.

This is my first attempt

%------------------------8<--------------------------
\def\placeformulatag%
   {\dosingleempty\doplaceformulatag}

\def\doplaceformulatag[#1]#2%
   {\let\normalstopformula\stopformula
    \def\stopformula%
     {\normalstopformula
      \restorenumber[formula]
      \egroup
      \let\stopformula\normalstopformula}
      \bgroup
      \savenumber[formula]
      \def\dummyconversion##1{#2}
      \defineconversion[dummyconversion][\dummyconversion]
      \setupformulas[conversion=dummyconversion]
      \placeformula[#1]}


\starttext
\placeformulatag[tag]{test} \startformula
   E = mc^2
\stopformula

See \in formula[tag] for a tagged formula
\stoptext
%----------------------------8<-------------------------

This one places (test) with the brackets in place of the formula 
number. It is easy to get rid of the brackets by using 
\setupformulas[left=,right=]. However, I do not know what will be a 
good interface for this.

In Latex, \tag{whatever} give (whatever) and \tag*{whatever} gives 
whatever without the brackets. But context does not use starred form 
of commands, and I do not want to introduce them here. One way is

\placeformulatag[ref][left=,right=] {my tag} ....

Is this fine? We can also have tagleft=... and tagright=... as part of 
setupformulas, or, if that is too confusion, have 
\setupformulatagging[left=...,right=...].

However, this idea does not work inside \startmathalignment as the 
conversion can not be changed inside a formula.

\placeformula \startformula \startalign
   \NC a \NC = b \NR[+]
   \setupformulas[conversion=set 1]
   \NC c \NC = d \NR[+]
\stopalign \stopformula

Is there some better way to achieve the same effect inside a 
mathalignment?

Aditya

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-08  5:49 New math feature requests Aditya Mahajan
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-08-25  1:34 ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-25  5:15 ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-26 16:37   ` Aditya Mahajan
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-25  5:15 UTC (permalink / raw)


On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:

[ A long list of feature requests ]

Here is something that was not in my original list: subformula 
numbering.

Context allows one to number subformulas by specifying the subnumber. 
Thus, if I want (1a) (1b) and (1c), I need to do

\placesubformula[+]{a} ....

\placesubformula[+]{b} ....

\placesubformula[+]{c} ....


Basically, do the numbering by hand. This is fine if there are only a 
few formulas, but there are some drawbacks of this approach. Firstly, 
if at a later stage you decide to move the equations around, you need 
to retype the formula numbers. Also, you need to remember to increment 
the formula numbers at the right time.

I was thinking of a better (rather more familar) way of treating 
subformulas by imitating the \begin{subequations} .... 
\end{subeqations} environment of latex.

I propose a \startsubformula .... \stopsubformula environment, so 
that inside it, I will get subformula numbers rather than formula 
numbers. Having discovered conversions (see my previous mail on tagged 
formulas), I tried to implement it using conversions. The following 
straightforward approach works fine. This is just a stop gap code, I 
do not take care of inherting the right settings for formulas, but 
it conveys the idea.

%--------------------------8<------------------------------------
\definenumber[tempformula]
\def\subformulaconversion#1{\getnumber[tempformula]\character{#1}}
% character should be modifiable using \setupsubformulas

\defineconversion[subformulaconversion][\subformulaconversion]

\def\startsubformulas%
   {\incrementnumber[formula]
    \expanded{\setupnumber[tempformula][start={\rawnumber[formula]}]}
    \savenumber[formula]
    \setupformulas[conversion=subformulaconversion]
    % way should be set to bytext
    \resetnumber[formula]
    }

\def\stopsubformulas%
   {\setupformulas[conversion=numbers]
    % conversion should be inherited from setupformulas
    % way should be restored to whatever it was earlier
    \restorenumber[formula]}

\startbuffer
\placeformula \startformula
   a^2 + b^2 = c^2
\stopformula
\stopbuffer

\starttext

\dorecurse{3}{\getbuffer}

Lets start subformulas

\startsubformulas
\dorecurse{3}{\getbuffer}
\stopsubformulas

Also works inside alignments

\startsubformulas
\placeformula \startformula \startalign
   \NC A \EQ B + C \NR[first]
   \NC D \EQ E + F \NR[+]
\stopalign \stopformula
\stopsubformulas

Notice that in \in formula[first] we get the correct reference.

\dorecurse{3}{\getbuffer}

\stoptext
%----------------------------8<---------------------------------------

Hans and Taco, can something like this be added to the core? If so, I 
will try to make this macro more robust (correct inheritence, etc.)

Aditya

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-25  5:15 ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-26 16:37   ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-28 15:12     ` Wolfgang Schuster
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-26 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw)


[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1108 bytes --]

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>
> [ A long list of feature requests ]
>
> Here is something that was not in my original list: subformula
> numbering.
>
> [...]
>
> I was thinking of a better (rather more familar) way of treating
> subformulas by imitating the \begin{subequations} ....
> \end{subeqations} environment of latex.
>
> I propose a \startsubformula .... \stopsubformula environment, so
> that inside it, I will get subformula numbers rather than formula
> numbers. Having discovered conversions (see my previous mail on tagged
> formulas), I tried to implement it using conversions. The following
> straightforward approach works fine. This is just a stop gap code, I
> do not take care of inherting the right settings for formulas, but
> it conveys the idea.
>
> Hans and Taco, can something like this be added to the core? If so, I
> will try to make this macro more robust (correct inheritence, etc.)

Here is a more robust version. I use \??sf as a namespace for 
subformulas. I do not think that this is used anywhere else.

Aditya


[-- Attachment #2: subformulas.tex --]
[-- Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 2022 bytes --]

\unprotect

%D \macros{setupsubformulas}

\def\setupsubformulas
  {\dodoubleargument\getparameters[\??sf]}

\definenumber
  [parentformula]
  [\c!text=parentformula,
   \c!way=\@@fmway]

\def\subformulaconversion#1%
  {\getnumber[parentformula]%
   \@@sfseparator%
   \convertnumber{\@@sfconversion}{#1}}

\defineconversion[subformulaconversion][\subformulaconversion]

%D \macros{startsubformulas}

\def\startsubformulas%
  {\bgroup
   \incrementnumber[\v!formula]
   \expanded{\setupnumber[parentformula][start={\rawnumber[\v!formula]}]}
   \savenumber[\v!formula]
   \setupformulas[conversion=subformulaconversion,way=\@@sfway]
   \resetnumber[\v!formula]}

\def\stopsubformulas%
  {\restorenumber[\v!formula]
   \resetlastlinewidth
   \nonoindentation
   \dochecknextindentation{\??sf}%
   \egroup
   \dorechecknextindentation} % here ?

% I have just copied the indentation checking from \stopformulas. I am not
% sure on how this works.


\setupsubformulas
  [\c!way=\v!by\v!text,
   \c!sectionnumber=\v!no,
   \c!conversion=\v!character,
   \c!separator=\@@fmseparator,
   \c!indentnext=\@@fmindentnext]

\protect

%D The test cases

\startbuffer
\placeformula \startformula
  a^2 + b^2 = c^2
\stopformula
\stopbuffer

\startsetups[test]
\dorecurse{3}{\getbuffer}

Lets start subformulas
\startsubformulas
  \dorecurse{3}{\getbuffer}
\stopsubformulas

Also works inside alignments
\startsubformulas
\placeformula \startformula \startalign
  \NC A \EQ B + C \NR[first]
  \NC D \EQ E + F \NR[+]
\stopalign \stopformula
\stopsubformulas

Notice that in \in formula[first] we get the correct reference.

\dorecurse{3}{\getbuffer}
\stopsetups


\starttext
\section{Default}
\setups[test]\page

\section{Section}
\setupformulas[way=bysection]
\setups[test]\page

\section{Roman}
\setupsubformulas[conversion=romannumerals]
\setups[test]\page

\section{Separator}
\setupsubformulas[separator=-]
\setups[test]\page

\stoptext

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 139 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-26 16:37   ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-28 15:12     ` Wolfgang Schuster
  2006-08-28 15:21       ` Hans Hagen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Schuster @ 2006-08-28 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)


On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:37:56 -0400 (EDT)
Aditya Mahajan <adityam@umich.edu> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> >
> > [ A long list of feature requests ]
> >
> > Here is something that was not in my original list: subformula
> > numbering.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I was thinking of a better (rather more familar) way of treating
> > subformulas by imitating the \begin{subequations} ....
> > \end{subeqations} environment of latex.
> >
> > I propose a \startsubformula .... \stopsubformula environment, so
> > that inside it, I will get subformula numbers rather than formula
> > numbers. Having discovered conversions (see my previous mail on tagged
> > formulas), I tried to implement it using conversions. The following
> > straightforward approach works fine. This is just a stop gap code, I
> > do not take care of inherting the right settings for formulas, but
> > it conveys the idea.
> >
> > Hans and Taco, can something like this be added to the core? If so, I
> > will try to make this macro more robust (correct inheritence, etc.)
> 
> Here is a more robust version. I use \??sf as a namespace for 
> subformulas. I do not think that this is used anywhere else.

I found nothing where \??sf is used in the ConText core, 
but it is defined as systemvariable in mult-sys line 552.

--> \definesystemvariable {sf}   % SpeciFics

You should ask Hans if he need it.

Wolfgang

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-28 15:12     ` Wolfgang Schuster
@ 2006-08-28 15:21       ` Hans Hagen
  2006-08-28 17:10         ` Aditya Mahajan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2006-08-28 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw)


Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:37:56 -0400 (EDT)
> Aditya Mahajan <adityam@umich.edu> wrote:
>
>   
>> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>>>
>>> [ A long list of feature requests ]
>>>
>>> Here is something that was not in my original list: subformula
>>> numbering.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I was thinking of a better (rather more familar) way of treating
>>> subformulas by imitating the \begin{subequations} ....
>>> \end{subeqations} environment of latex.
>>>
>>> I propose a \startsubformula .... \stopsubformula environment, so
>>> that inside it, I will get subformula numbers rather than formula
>>> numbers. Having discovered conversions (see my previous mail on tagged
>>> formulas), I tried to implement it using conversions. The following
>>> straightforward approach works fine. This is just a stop gap code, I
>>> do not take care of inherting the right settings for formulas, but
>>> it conveys the idea.
>>>
>>> Hans and Taco, can something like this be added to the core? If so, I
>>> will try to make this macro more robust (correct inheritence, etc.)
>>>       
>> Here is a more robust version. I use \??sf as a namespace for 
>> subformulas. I do not think that this is used anywhere else.
>>     
>
> I found nothing where \??sf is used in the ConText core, 
> but it is defined as systemvariable in mult-sys line 552.
>
> --> \definesystemvariable {sf}   % SpeciFics
>
> You should ask Hans if he need it.
>
>   

core-env.tex : 6 :   {\long\setvalue{\??sf#1}{#2}}
core-env.tex : 12 :      \getvalue{\??sf#1}\relax
core-env.tex : 15 :      \getvalue{\??sf#1}\relax

on my machine

Hans

-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-28 15:21       ` Hans Hagen
@ 2006-08-28 17:10         ` Aditya Mahajan
  2006-08-28 21:55           ` Hans Hagen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Aditya Mahajan @ 2006-08-28 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)


On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Hans Hagen wrote:

> Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:37:56 -0400 (EDT)
>> Aditya Mahajan <adityam@umich.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Here is a more robust version. I use \??sf as a namespace for
>>> subformulas. I do not think that this is used anywhere else.
>>
>> I found nothing where \??sf is used in the ConText core,
>> but it is defined as systemvariable in mult-sys line 552.
>>
>> --> \definesystemvariable {sf}   % SpeciFics
>>
>> You should ask Hans if he need it.
>
> core-env.tex : 6 :   {\long\setvalue{\??sf#1}{#2}}
> core-env.tex : 12 :      \getvalue{\??sf#1}\relax
> core-env.tex : 15 :      \getvalue{\??sf#1}\relax
>
> on my machine

Alright, how about if I add a new variable

\definesystemvariable {subfm}   % subForMulas

or do I need to stick to two letter acronyms?

Aditya

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* Re: New math feature requests
  2006-08-28 17:10         ` Aditya Mahajan
@ 2006-08-28 21:55           ` Hans Hagen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 2006-08-28 21:55 UTC (permalink / raw)


Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>
> \definesystemvariable {subfm}   % subForMulas
>
> or do I need to stick to two letter acronyms?
>   
in this case i'd go for a double one: 

you can take \definesystemvariable {fn}  

i didn't look into your code yet (but you're improving it anyway) 


Hans 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2006-08-28 21:55 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-08-08  5:49 New math feature requests Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-08  5:59 ` Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-08  8:14   ` Hans Hagen
2006-08-08 14:20 ` Taco Hoekwater
2006-08-08 15:38   ` Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-25  1:34 ` Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-25  5:15 ` Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-26 16:37   ` Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-28 15:12     ` Wolfgang Schuster
2006-08-28 15:21       ` Hans Hagen
2006-08-28 17:10         ` Aditya Mahajan
2006-08-28 21:55           ` Hans Hagen

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).