Re: Re: Re: typesetting fractions

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg45843] Re: [mg45815] Re: [mg45785] Re: typesetting fractions*From*: Selwyn Hollis <sh2.7183 at misspelled.erthlink.net>*Date*: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 04:50:35 -0500 (EST)*References*: <200401201008.FAA27408@smc.vnet.net> <200401220837.DAA17457@smc.vnet.net> <buqmch$raa$1@smc.vnet.net> <200401250804.DAA19334@smc.vnet.net> <200401260653.BAA29776@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

One can affect page breaks by adjusting the spacing between cells. This is incredibly tedious to do with the Options Inspector, but there is a palette named "Glue" (find it at MathSource) that lets you select a whole page of heterogeneous cells and shrink or expand the between-cell spacings. I've used it extensively, and it cuts the time needed to page-break a 50 page document from several hours down to about an hour (for me anyway---I'm rather picky). ----- Selwyn Hollis http://www.math.armstrong.edu/faculty/hollis (edit reply-to to reply) On Jan 26, 2004, at 1:53 AM, Murray Eisenberg wrote: > 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 >> >> >> > > -- > Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu > Mathematics & Statistics Dept. > Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H) > University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W) > 710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801 > Amherst, MA 01003-9305 > >

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: Re: Re: typesetting fractions***From:*Murray Eisenberg <murray@math.umass.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: Re: typesetting fractions***From:*Murray Eisenberg <murray@math.umass.edu>

**Re: typesetting fractions**

**a bug in Det of complex matrix - Mathematica 5**

**Re: Re: typesetting fractions**

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