Re: Re: typesetting fractions

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg45956] Re: [mg45923] Re: typesetting fractions*From*: Selwyn Hollis <sh2.7183 at misspelled.erthlink.net>*Date*: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 04:17:17 -0500 (EST)*References*: <200401291036.FAA09875@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

On Jan 29, 2004, at 5:36 AM, Paul Abbott wrote: > In article <buqmch$raa$1 at smc.vnet.net>, Garry Helzer <gah at math.umd.edu> > wrote: > > >> 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? > > Mathematica's typesetting (developed by Neil Soiffer, now at Design > Science, Inc) *is* based on TeX's typesetting of math (appendix G of > the > TeX book). I find this assertion very bizarre, since so much of Mathematica's behavior quite different from TeX, especially with regard to spacing. Here's just one example: If I have a fraction with, say, x+1 in the denominator, I get exactly that --- no spacing at all between the glyphs -- so I have to go in and insert spaces manually. > The fonts (developed by Andre Kuzniarek <mailto:andre at wolfram.com>) > are different, and TeX's fonts specify certain metrics that are used in > TeX's typesetting, so the typesetting of math using the Mathematica > fonts (which, IMHO, look much better than Knuth's computer modern) will > look a little different, but not too different. But Mathematica's fonts only include symbols, Greek letters, and the like. No doubt Times is typically used for Roman letters and numerals; so are we to assume that the metrics used are based on Times Roman? And if so, whose version of Times Roman? (This is something I tried long ago to get a straight answer on -- and failed.) I believe that much of the difficulty with typesetting in Mathematica is that what you see on the screen is often not an accurate representation of how a document will print out. Spacings are different and lines break at different places at different magnifications. Moreover, I have noticed on numerous occasions that simply closing and reopening a notebook will cause on-screen spacings to appear differently. Here's another source of fun in Mac OS X: Spacing between words -- thus line breaks in text cells, and thus page breaks -- are not shown correctly on-screen until after you do a Page Setup (or print). This can lead to a great deal of aggravation until you get into the habit of always doing a Page Setup upon opening a notebook. Anyway ... I hope that all this complaining is pointless in light of the vastly improved and completely rewritten 6.0 front end that's coming soon. (Right?) :^) ----- Selwyn Hollis http://www.math.armstrong.edu/faculty/hollis (edit reply-to to reply)

**References**:**Re: typesetting fractions***From:*Paul Abbott <paul@physics.uwa.edu.au>

**Re: Mathematica and XML**

**Re: Re: Simple question or how Mathematica getting on my nerves.**

**Re: typesetting fractions**

**Re: typesetting fractions**