Re: typesetting fractions

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg45852] Re: typesetting fractions*From*: drbob at bigfoot.com (Bobby R. Treat)*Date*: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 04:50:51 -0500 (EST)*References*: <200401201008.FAA27408@smc.vnet.net> <200401220837.DAA17457@smc.vnet.net> <buqmch$raa$1@smc.vnet.net> <200401250804.DAA19334@smc.vnet.net> <bv2fkf$4l$1@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

My bigger problem is too-early page breaks, not the too-late kind. And there's no WYSIWG (even with page-breaks showing), so I have to print every time I want to check on how much white space is being produced. I have seen pages printed with just one short cell. Bobby Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu> wrote in message news:<bv2fkf$4l$1 at smc.vnet.net>... > The trouble with controlling page breaks may be due, in part, to a > central paradigm of the Front End, namely, as a medium primarily for > display on computer screens and secondairly for printout from a computer > screen. > > A "real" typesetting functionality would facilitate page-breaking > (automatically) within cells. Mathematica does not like to break within > cells. Of course one CAN apply the Option Inspector setting to change > PageBreakWithin to True from its default Automatic and hope for the best. > > Bobby R. Treat wrote: > > > I couldn't agree more. I haven't even learned to control page breaks > > -- and that needs to be COMPLETELY transparent. > > > > Bobby > > > > Garry Helzer <gah at math.umd.edu> wrote in message news:<buqmch$raa$1 at smc.vnet.net>... > > > >>Since Selwyn has fallen down in the venting department I will offer a > >>few remarks. > >> > >>For the last few years I have used Mathematica exclusively for > >>technical writing, mostly because it gives me better control over > >>figure placement and keeps everything in a single file. That said, it > >>is nonetheless an aggravating experience in many ways. The > >>subscript/quotient font size problem is a daily irritation. Here's my > >>question. TeX does an excellent job in this regard. TeX has been around > >>since the '60s and is open source. Why doesn't someone at WRI just look > >>at how TeX does it and incorporate the rules? Why reinvent the > >>wheel especially if the wheels you produce in house always seem to have > >>corners on the rim? > >> > >>A personal bugaboo of mine is the spelling checker. I don't have > >>problems with the spelling checker in any other software, just > >>Mathematica. Ever since 3.0 I have been trying to teach it that > >>bivector is a word. No luck. It just keeps telling me to try bevatron > >>instead. I tell it to learn the word, it puts it in some user defined > >>dictionary, and then ignores it. > >> > >>I keep a copy of the Summer-Fall 1999 issue of Mathematica in Education > >>and Research in a file cabinet just so I can look up how to change an > >>unmatched bracket from pink to black whenever I want to define a > >>multiline function (p. 87). > >> > >>Indications are that someone at WRI wants to develop Mathematica into a > >>first rate technical publishing tool. It should be explained to them > >>that this is just a waste of time and talent if the use of the tool > >>is to be such a jealously guarded secret. > >> > >>If Mathematica is to have more than marginal use as a technical > >>publication system WRI needs to produce, in house or outhouse, a > >>Mathematica equivalent of The Joy of TeX. Cursory documentation and > >>scattered hints in journals will not do it. > >> > >>On Jan 22, 2004, at 3:37 AM, Selwyn Hollis wote: > >> > >> > >>>On Jan 20, 2004, at 5:08 AM, John Fultz wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>I didn't reply to this thread earlier because I figured one of the > >>>>usual > >>>>experts would pick it up and run with it, but it appears not. By > >>>>reading > >>>>Selwyn's answer, I think he knows how to do this but decided to vent > >>>>about > >>>>the method rather than explain it. > >>> > >>>What, me vent? I could show you venting, but I won't. > >>> > >>>The real issue here is why this design flaw has persisted from version > >>>3.0 to version 5.0. It is clearly an example of sheer corner-cutting. > >>>There is no typographical rationale whatsoever for treating numerators > >>>and denominators of fractions the same way as subscripts and > >>>superscripts. > >>> > >>>For example, what if I want to have ScriptSizeMultipliers->1 in a > >>>fraction that contains subexpressions with superscripts? Then the > >>>superscripts are the same size as the bases to which they are attached, > >>>and the whole thing looks silly -- thus I have go in and do a lot of > >>>meticulous tweaking. > >>> > >>>Again, I could be missing something and have wasted countless hours in > >>>trying to make many hundreds of pages worthy of publication. But maybe > >>>it's my own fault for dreaming that I could approach TeX-like quality > >>>with Mathematica. > >>> > >>>----- > >>>Selwyn Hollis > >>>http://www.math.armstrong.edu/faculty/hollis > >>>(edit reply-to to reply) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>In the Option Inspector is an option called ScriptSizeMultipliers. > >>>>This, > >>>>combined with the ScriptMinSize, determines sizing for fractions and > >>>>scripts (sorry, Selwyn). The easiest way to do what Murray and Sabit > >>>>want > >>>>is to set the ScriptSizeMultipliers option to 1. This could be set > >> > >> at > >> > >>>>the > >>>>notebook or global level, as you feel appropriate, or wrapped > >>>>individually > >>>>around fractions if you don't want sub/superscripts to pick up the > >>>>option > >>>>value. > >>>> > >>>>To answer Sabit's second question, select the bracket of the cell > >>>>you'd > >>>>like to change, and use the Option Inspector to set the > >>>>SingleLetterItalics > >>>>option to False at the selection scope. > >>>> > >>>>Sincerely, > >>>> > >>>>John Fultz > >>>>jfultz at wolfram.com > >>>>User Interface Group > >>>>Wolfram Research, Inc. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:58:02 -0500 (EST), Murray Eisenberg wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>I quite agree that this is an annoyance with Mahematica's typsetting > >>>>>of > >>>>>mathematics. > >>>>> > >>>>>An underlying difficulty is that there is no separate notion of > >>>>>"display > >>>>>math" -- mathematical expressions displayed on separate lines -- as > >>>>>opposed to math within normal paragraphs of text. This may be an > >>>>>unfortunate front-end design limitation. > >>>>> > >>>>>The problem is reminiscent of the same problem in LaTeX, where > >>>>>in-line, > >>>>>built-up fractions (and other constructs) have their components >>> small. > >>>>>But in LaTeX, there is an option (which one needs to apply to each > >>>>>instance) to make such in-line math "displaystyle", which enlarges the > >>>>>components to the same large size as if they were in a display. > >>>>> > >>>>>I devoutly wish there were such a capability in Mathematica -- > >>>>>whether a > >>>>>per-instance option as with LaTeX, or a global option for a notebook. > >>>>> > >>>>>Selwyn Hollis wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>My understanding is that the size of fractions is determined by the > >>>>>>same option that determines the size of subscripts and superscripts, > >>>>>>which is highly unfortunate. I could be wrong about this; if so I'd > >>>>>>love to find out. I find it a major pain in the neck always to have > >>>>>>to > >>>>>>increase the size of fractions manually. Maybe this is an > >>>>>>improvement > >>>>>>we can hope for in version 6.0. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>----- > >>>>>>Selwyn Hollis > >>>>>>http://www.math.armstrong.edu/faculty/hollis > >>>>>>(edit reply-to to reply) > >>>>>> > >>>>>>On Jan 14, 2004, at 1:26 AM, sabit wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>I am trying to do some typesetting with mathematica. I noticed that > >>>>>>>in > >>>>>>>some styles fractions are set in reduced point size. What is the > >>>>>>>option that would fix this? I want both denominator and the > >>>>>>>numerator > >>>>>>>set in the same size as the text. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Also I have the single letter italic enabled for cells where I > >> > >> have > >> > >>>>>>>the equations but in the cells where there is a lot of text I > >> > >> don't > >> > >>>>>>>want this option. Now I copy and paste a previous cell and use it > >> > >> > >> > >>>>>>>as > >>>>>>>new cell but I am sure there is a better way, probably with > >> > >> styles. > >> > >>>>>>>Wolfram site lists two documents about typesetting but they are > >> > >> not > >> > >>>>>>>available to download. Does anyone know a good reference for > >>>>>>>tpesetting with mathematica? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>Garry Helzer > >>Department of Mathematics > >>University of Maryland > >>College Park, MD 20742 > >>301-405-5176 > >>gah at math.umd.edu > > > > > >

**References**:**Re: Re: Re: typesetting fractions***From:*John Fultz <jfultz@wolfram.com>

**Re: Re: Re: Re: typesetting fractions***From:*Selwyn Hollis <sh2.7183@misspelled.erthlink.net>

**Re: typesetting fractions***From:*drbob@bigfoot.com (Bobby R. Treat)

**RE: Stretching X-Axis in Plot[]**

**Re: Re: Re: typesetting fractions**

**Re: Re: Re: Re: typesetting fractions**

**Re: typesetting fractions**