[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Typesetting in Mathematica (TraditionalForm typesetting?)
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg125701] Re: Typesetting in Mathematica (TraditionalForm typesetting?)
*From*: Brentt <brenttnewman at gmail.com>
*Date*: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 03:01:42 -0500 (EST)
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
*References*: <201203280959.EAA11124@smc.vnet.net>
I just discovered the Journal article stylesheet, which has perfect
key-board mappings for note taking. Thanks for everyone for the input
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Brentt <brenttnewman at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you, I've been using LaTeX for a few years now (before I began
> university), and feel pretty confident in it. I use emacs when using LaTeX,
> which has all kinds of keyboard shortcuts, so I have all kinds of shortcuts
> and keyboard tricks when using it but I've found it very cumbersome to use
> in any sort of quick and dirty way even when defining commands for oft used
> commands.
>
> And on top of that, when taking notes in class, I find it much harder to
> absorb the meaning of the equations while typing LaTeX code, so some WYSYWG
> of Mathematica is nice. I have actually found Mathematica very near
> adequate, but there are just a couple of these minor issues. It's so close
> to be adequate it's almost frustrating that it is not completely adequate
> given it seems like it could be if there were just a little more easy
> customizability of the notebook..
>
> I'm just experimenting right now but I've been thinking it doesn't seem
> all that more efficient to type say \int_{a}^b f(x) dx than esc int esc
> ctrl+_ a ctrl+b f(x) dx The number of key presses are comparable. Output
> of course is not near as nice as LaTeX but it is passable.
>
> I've been looking into Lyx too. I'm really experimenting trying to figure
> out which would be best. Maybe mathematica won't work out so well, but it
> seems so close.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>wrote:
>
>> Brentt,
>>
>> This is probably best conveyed off-list.
>>
>> I utterly love Mathematica for all sorts of things. But for note-taking
>> during a class, I cannot imagine that Mathematica is a very efficient
>> medium. After all, to get all kinds of symbols you have to use Esc or Ctrl
>> sequence combinations, or awkward \[...\] strings, or menu buttons.
>>
>> I should think that if you don't want to use paper and pencil, it would
>> be _much_ more efficient to use LaTeX markup. Thus, typing
>>
>> \int_0^{\infty} e^{\pi i t} dt
>>
>> than the corresponding thing in Mathematica. You could even, if you wish,
>> omit the leading "\" symbols in such things and insert them later in a text
>> editor with search-and-replace.
>>
>> And of course you can always import TeX mark-up text into Mathematica.
>>
>> There is a way to add new keyboard shortcuts, and as I recall that
>> requires modifying one of Mathematica's system files. I'm sure others will
>> post explanations about that.
>>
>> Murray
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/12 3:44 PM, Brentt wrote:
>>
>>> Oh that works. That helps a lot thanks :)
>>>
>>> I guess the only think remaining: is there anyway to turn a cell into
>>> DisplayForm using a keyboard shortcut? Is there a way to define custom
>>> shortcuts if one doesn't already exist?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Murray Eisenberg<murray at math.umass.**
>>> edu <murray at math.umass.edu>>wrote:
>>>
>>> You do NOT have to evaluate an Input cell in order to convert it to
>>>> TraditionalForm! Just select it (or all Input cells, if you wish), and
>>>> use
>>>> the menu item Cell> Convert To> Traditional Form.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/28/12 5:59 AM, Brentt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Summary of question: Is there a cell style that can do TraditionalForm
>>>>> like
>>>>> typesetting (without first evaluating an input cell?) And if this
>>>>> capability exists, can the functionality be bound to a key combination
>>>>> (shortcut)?
>>>>> ================
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, I've been trying to use Mathematica for taking class notes and
>>>>> homework
>>>>> assignments lately. In general I've found it faster than typing things
>>>>> up
>>>>> in LaTeX and it has passable typesetting quality, but there is one
>>>>> minor
>>>>> issue I've been having that I've not been able to find a solution to in
>>>>> the
>>>>> docs:
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't figure out how to do a good "non-inline" formulas (off-line?),
>>>>> something like latex's math environment ("\[ ... \]" or $$ ... $$.)
>>>>>
>>>>> The "DisplayFormula" cell style formats equations like a proper latex
>>>>> "off-line" math environment, except the font is a thin, not very nice
>>>>> looking font.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know Mathematica has some decent math fonts, because TraditionalForm
>>>>> output is rather nice, except to get a TraditionalForm font apparently
>>>>> one
>>>>> first has to evaluate an input cell, and accept Mathematica's default
>>>>> symbolic manipulations (barring tinkering), which isn't a very
>>>>> convenient
>>>>> set up for quick typesetting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a cell style that can do TraditionalForm like typesetting
>>>>> (without
>>>>> first evaluating an input cell?) And if this capability exists, can the
>>>>> functionality be bound to a key shortcut?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>
>
Prev by Date:
**Re: Typesetting in Mathematica (TraditionalForm typesetting?)**
Next by Date:
**reduce size of eps files of 3D figures**
Previous by thread:
**Re: Typesetting in Mathematica (TraditionalForm typesetting?)**
Next by thread:
**Re: Typesetting in Mathematica (TraditionalForm typesetting?)**
| |