Re: [toolbox] LaTeXiT 1.2 beta
Status: Planning
Brought to you by:
jlaurens
From: Maarten S. <maa...@xs...> - 2005-07-03 13:09:14
|
On 3 Jul 2005, at 14:53, Herbert Schulz wrote: > Many people still use $...$ for in-line maths but a ``more LaTeX > way'' would be to use \(...\). Except that \( and \) are fragile, and $...$ isn't. I think The LaTeX Companion or Lamport explicitly state that $...$ is more robust. > Under normal circumstances they are equivalent but some packages > may redefine \( and \) for their own purposes while $ (or something > with the same catcode) is a TeX primitive. > > I'm not sure there would any difference between $\displaystyle ...$ > (or the \(\displaystyle ... \)) and \[...\] besides some vertical > spacing and centering. What happens if there is an array? Arrays will set normally, it is with the multi-line constructs from the amsmath package that the trouble really starts. Frankly, getting a template that would allow us to obtain displayed maths _and_ get the baseline offset has been a nightmare (and is still unresolved). May I point you to http://www.xs4all.nl/~msneep/ articles/baseline.html for background information? Maarten |