Hi Andrés, thank you!
Am 20.03.24 um 06:07 schrieb Andres Conrado Montoya:
I have found with experience that a formula to calculate the binding
correction for a saddle stitch binding, not more than 4 pages in a
signature (only one fold in the middle) usually is 1/2 the
circumference
://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/38682/rules-of-thumb-for-size-of-binding-correction-bcor
However, that discussion is 12 years old and the links referenced as
sources are dead now.
I have found with experience that a formula to calculate the binding
correction for a saddle stitch binding, not more than 4 pages
On 3/12/2024 8:57 AM, Max Chernoff wrote:
Hi all,
Often I want to include a sentence/paragraph in the middle of a long
multipart formula. With the old \startalign/\stopalign formulas, I could
use \intertext{...} to do this, but this doesn't work with the new
\alignhere/\breakhere formulas. I've
On 3/12/2024 8:57 AM, Max Chernoff wrote:
Hi all,
Often I want to include a sentence/paragraph in the middle of a long
multipart formula. With the old \startalign/\stopalign formulas, I could
use \intertext{...} to do this, but this doesn't work with the new
\alignhere/\breakhere formulas. I've
Hi all,
Often I want to include a sentence/paragraph in the middle of a long
multipart formula. With the old \startalign/\stopalign formulas, I could
use \intertext{...} to do this, but this doesn't work with the new
\alignhere/\breakhere formulas. I've managed to find a "sol
is, that in the following sentence only the number (3.1) is a
placed formula in an example, should have a link. Without the brackets. The
sentence says:
Task 1: Formulate equivalents according to rule (3.1):
Sorry, I have no example.
Uschi
re different, but diffpdf is not able to distinguish between
them [in appearance]).
> The Problem is, that in the following sentence only the number (3.1) is
> a placed formula in an example, should have a link. Without the
> brackets. The sentence says:
>
> Task 1: Formulate eq
Dear List,
In the Documentation IntroCTX_eng_s.pdf at page 170 , I found the two examples
with \in and \at, and also the lable.
The Problem is, that in the following sentence only the number (3.1) is a
placed formula in an example, should have a link. Without the brackets. The
sentence says
/tex/texmf-context/tex/context/base/mkxl/node-shp.lmt:37>\n (...tail
> calls...)",
> ["lasttexerror"]="",
> ["linenumber"]=85,
> ["offset"]=10,
> ["skiplinenumber"]=85,
> }
>
> Also, attached you will find the log fil
On Sun, 25 Feb 2024, Andres Conrado Montoya wrote:
> Another remark: It seems this behavior is consistent: if I comment out the
> last equation before the one I told you before, again the next formula
> works fine,
Would it be possible to create a reproducible example
Another remark: It seems this behavior is consistent: if I comment out the
last equation before the one I told you before, again the next formula
works fine,
El dom, 25 feb 2024 a las 15:38, Andres Conrado Montoya (<
andresconr...@gmail.com>) escribió:
> A remark: A few lines above
\item $y = 2x - 1$ \startplacefigure[location={here,none}]\useMPgraphic{mark}\stopplacefigure\stopitemize \item Find the formula of the line 1: \vfill \item Find the formula of the line 2: \vfill\stopitemize\sto
on={here,none}]\useMPgraphic{mark}\stopplacefigure\stopitemize \item Find the formula of the line 1: \vfill \item Find the formula of the line 2: \vfill\stopitemize\stopcolumnset\stoptext%%
testColumns.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
testColumnset.pdf
Description: Adobe
ared,
>
> I got the same output in which there is an overlap of the formula on the last
> line of the paragraph. The following line shows the version of my
> installation.
>
> system >
> system > ConTeXt ver: 2024.01.08 11:23 LMTX fmt: 2024
Dear Otared,
I got the same output in which there is an overlap of the formula on the last
line of the paragraph. The following line shows the version of my installation.
system >
system > ConTeXt ver: 2024.01.08 11:23 LMTX fmt: 2024.1.17 int:
english/english
the sum.
>
> /Mikael
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 2:41 PM Shiv Shankar Dayal
> wrote:
> >
> > I have following formula
> > \sum_{k=0\\ k\equiv p + 1(\mathrm{mod}\;2)}^{p -1} but the \\ does not
> break the line below Sigma. How can I achieve this because AFAIK
Hi,
you can try something like
\sum_{\mstack{k=0, k\equiv p + 1 (\mtext{mod }2)}}^{p -1}
but it will not be too pretty with such a large sub-index to the sum.
/Mikael
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 2:41 PM Shiv Shankar Dayal
wrote:
>
> I have following formula
> \sum_{k=0\\ k\equiv p +
Am 15.01.24 um 13:21 schrieb Hans Hagen:
On 1/15/2024 8:00 AM, Shiv Shankar Dayal wrote:
Thanks a lot Mikael.
in addition: in context lmtx {} are grouping symbols not (ordinary)
empty atoms
Only in math, or generally?
\startquotation
{}[…] Here I need the empty group, otherwise the
I have following formula
\sum_{k=0\\ k\equiv p + 1(\mathrm{mod}\;2)}^{p -1} but the \\ does not
break the line below Sigma. How can I achieve this because AFAIK it will
work in LaTeX?
--
Respect,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
;>
wrote:
>
> Suppose I want to typeset the formula: 1 - {}^nC_2\tan^2\theta +
{}^nC_4 then it appears as if n is power of - and +. The same
formula in LaTeX comes out nicely. Is there something I need to change?
>
> --
> Resp
> If you want them below, use double _.
>
> /Mikael
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 7:45 AM Shiv Shankar Dayal
> wrote:
> >
> > Suppose I want to typeset the formula: 1 - {}^nC_2\tan^2\theta + {}^nC_4
> then it appears as if n is power of - and +. The same for
ypeset the formula: 1 - {}^nC_2\tan^2\theta + {}^nC_4 then
> it appears as if n is power of - and +. The same formula in LaTeX comes out
> nicely. Is there something I need to change?
>
> --
> Respect,
Suppose I want to typeset the formula: 1 - {}^nC_2\tan^2\theta + {}^nC_4
then it appears as if n is power of - and +. The same formula in LaTeX
comes out nicely. Is there something I need to change?
--
Respect,
Shiv Shankar Dayal
iously outdated.
>
> Some elements that might fit:
> – some example code (like from Mikael’s BachoTeX presentation)
> – anatomy of a word and a formula (with all those little boxes and measures),
> maybe also in Arabic
> – dodo & cow drawings from Mikael’s math manual
>
a Tux with its TikZ
source code in the back.)
We also had posters that show the architecture of TeX/LaTeX, but they
were seriously outdated.
Some elements that might fit:
– some example code (like from Mikael’s BachoTeX presentation)
– anatomy of a word and a formula (with all those little boxes
On 05/01/2024 14:27, Ursula Hermann wrote:
This is a formular with factorial.
0! := 1
(n + 1)! := (n + 1) n!
this looks more like a code example than a math formula
Can someone help me please?
\starttyping
0! := 1
(n + 1)! := (n + 1) n!
\stoptyping
with:
- multidimensional delimiter
- vertical spacing inside
- horizontal spacing oustside
- anchoring degrees
- left and right radicals
- more consistent rules (char based)
- size dependent additional spacing (avoid clash)
- normalize size across formula
- lack of granularity in variants sizes
by now
rdisplayspace \egroup
\p_threshold
\strc_formulas_place_number \strc_formulas_flush_number \dostarttagged
\t!formulacontent \empty \dotagregisterformula \c_strc_formulas_n \csname
\e!stop \formulaparameter \c!alternative \v!formula \endcsname
\dostoptagged \dostoptagged \nonoindentati
ends on your OS. In mine it's python3
\defineexternalfilter
[pythontyping]
[filtercommand={python3 \externalfilterinputfile \space >
\externalfilteroutputfile},
output={\externalfilterbasefile.tex},
cache=yes,
readcommand=\typefile,
spacebefore=medium,
spaceafter=medium]
%We copy settings to sa
gt; A = B
> \stopformula
>
> vs
>
> \startformula \startalign
> \NC A \NC B \NR
> \NC A \NC B \NR
> \stopalign \stopformula
> \stoptext
>
> The first display formula is flush left, but the aligned formula is centered
> on the page. This appears to be a regression com
The first display formula is flush left, but the aligned formula is centered on
the page. This appears to be a regression compared to MkIV, where the above
example works correctly.
Aditya
___
If your question
with Homebrew.
There is a very complicated thread on stackoverflow on how to downgrade to
previous versions of a formula in homebrew, but it is far too complicated for
my wee brain.
zint 2.12.0 works for me on an x64 Mac mini using ConTeXt ver: 2023.08.10 02:59
Following the instructions here <ht
orrect, is ConTeXt
> likely to be updated so that 2.12.0 works? I originally installed zint with
> Homebrew. There is a very complicated thread on stackoverflow on how to
> downgrade to previous versions of a formula in homebrew, but it is far too
> complicated for my wee brain.
zint 2.1
Homebrew. There is a very complicated thread on
> > stackoverflow on how to downgrade to previous versions of a formula in
> > homebrew, but it is far too complicated for my wee brain.
>
> Hans updated ConTeXt to account for 2.12.0 already in April, so it
> should work, but maybe the
If I am correct, is
> ConTeXt likely to be updated so that 2.12.0 works? I originally
> installed zint with Homebrew. There is a very complicated thread on
> stackoverflow on how to downgrade to previous versions of a formula in
> homebrew, but it is far too complicated for my wee brain.
Hans
installed zint with Homebrew. There is a very complicated thread on
stackoverflow on how to downgrade to previous versions of a formula in
homebrew, but it is far too complicated for my wee brain.
Thanks
Keith McKay
0) -- (2,0) -- cycle;
34
35 % aigua
Somewhere in the math formula just ended, you used the stated character from an
undefined font family. For example, plain TeX doesn't allow \it or \sl in
subscripts. Proceed, and I'll try to forget that I needed that character.
mtx-context | fatal e
\NR
> \NC x = k - D = \NC \pm \sqrt{ D^2 - \frac{c}{a}} - D\quad \text{desfeim el
> canvi} \NR
> \stopalign
> \stopformula
> on $D = (\frac{b}{2a})$ i $x = k-D$.
>
>
> and then the formula goes to next page. Is there any way to split align
> environment? In wiki I could not fin
= k-D$.
and then the formula goes to next page. Is there any way to split align
environment? In wiki I could not find nothing.
Thanks in advance,
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add
Am Montag, 14. August 2023, 13:33:33 CEST schrieb Hans Hagen:
> On 8/14/2023 1:16 PM, Gerion Entrup wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I try to typeset a nested align in a formula. However, the results looks
> > really wrong. Here is a MWE:
> >
> > ```
> > \st
= someother \NR
\stopwhatever \NR
\NC somelong = \NC bla \NR
\stopalign
\stopformula
\stoptext
/Mikael
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 1:20 PM Gerion Entrup wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I try to typeset a nested align in a formula. However, the results looks
> really wrong. Here is a MWE:
>
On 8/14/2023 1:16 PM, Gerion Entrup wrote:
Hi,
I try to typeset a nested align in a formula. However, the results looks
really wrong. Here is a MWE:
```
\starttext
\startformula
\startalign
\NC a = \NC (b, c) \quad \text{with}\NR
\NC \NC \startalign
Hi,
I try to typeset a nested align in a formula. However, the results looks
really wrong. Here is a MWE:
```
\starttext
\startformula
\startalign
\NC a = \NC (b, c) \quad \text{with}\NR
\NC \NC \startalign
\NC b \NC
cannot say from
https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/mupdf).
If I try to sign the output PDF with the previous password, using
mupdf-gl or "mutool sign" (version 1.2.2), the signature annotation is
only viewed by MuPDF, MuPDF-GL and SumatraPDF.
On Linux, neither Evince or xpdf can display the
and if we should have a decent default for that (like
\orphanpenalties 2 150 100 ).
- Math formula number placement (as well as alignment sinside narrower)
has been made a bit more robust and we added some placement options that
will be discussed in the (by now 1739 page thick) upcoming math manual.
ut \stopinnermath
> > \afterdisplayspace \egroup
> > \m_operator_text
> > \strc_formulas_place_number \strc_formulas_flush_number
> \dostarttagged \t!formulacontent \empty \dotagregisterformula
> \c_strc_formulas_n \csname \e!stop \formulaparameter \c!alternative
> \v!f
h_number_check \or \strc_math_number_check_outside \else
> > > \strc_math_number_check_inside \fi \str
> > > \m_operator_text
> > > \endgroup \strc_formulas_endstrut \stopinnermath
> > > \afterdisplayspace \egroup
> > > \m_operator_text
> &g
m_operator_text
> > \endgroup \strc_formulas_endstrut \stopinnermath
> > \afterdisplayspace \egroup
> > \m_operator_text
> > \strc_formulas_place_number \strc_formulas_flush_number \dostarttagged
> > \t!formulacontent \empty \dotagregisterformula \c_strc_form
dgroup \strc_formulas_endstrut \stopinnermath
> \afterdisplayspace \egroup
> \m_operator_text
> \strc_formulas_place_number \strc_formulas_flush_number \dostarttagged
> \t!formulacontent \empty \dotagregisterformula \c_strc_formulas_n \csname
> \e!stop \formulaparameter \c!alternat
; \t!formulacontent \empty \dotagregisterformula \c_strc_formulas_n \csname
> \e!stop \formulaparameter \c!alternative \v!formula \endcsname
> \dostoptagged \dostoptagged \nonoindentati
>
> \stopformula
>
> \startformula
> \int_{\infty}
> >> \stopf
rut \stopinnermath
\afterdisplayspace \egroup
\m_operator_text
\strc_formulas_place_number \strc_formulas_flush_number \dostarttagged
\t!formulacontent \empty \dotagregisterformula \c_strc_formulas_n \csname
\e!stop \formulaparameter \c!alternative \v!formula \endcsname
\dostoptagged \dostoptag
> that's pretty clear: you don't load a math font at all, maybe some text font
> pretending it is math
>
> > Sorry, but sorry doesn't cut it here.
>
> it does: no proper math font found so reason to complain
>
> > I guess it must have been referring to \strc_formul
here.
it does: no proper math font found so reason to complain
I guess it must have been referring to \strc_formulas_place_number
\strc_formulas_flush_number \dostarttagged \t!formulacontent \empty
\dotagregisterformula \c_strc_formulas_n \csname \e!stop \formulaparameter
\c!alternative \v
> names > duplicate files : 164
fonts > names > total scan time : 16.487 seconds
before it produced even error messages.
beating me for 2 seconds. Great. And then it restricted my freedom by saying
«Sorry, but I can't typeset math unless various parameters
gt; I should place two faily simple formulae next to each other, they should be
> coupled by ‘or’. What I have now is, that the formulae indeed are next to
> each other and separated by ‘or’, but the result of the second formula is
> moved und this formula to the next line.
> In the
ntg-context@ntg.nl> a écrit :
> Good afternoon everybody,
>
> I should place two faily simple formulae next to each other, they should
> be coupled by ‘or’. What I have now is, that the formulae indeed are next
> to each other and separated by ‘or’, but the result of the second f
Good afternoon everybody,
I should place two faily simple formulae next to each other, they should be
coupled by ‘or’. What I have now is, that the formulae indeed are next to each
other and separated by ‘or’, but the result of the second formula is moved und
this formula to the next line
On 3/9/2023 2:45 PM, Otared Kavian via ntg-context wrote:
Hi Hans,
I noticed that in some situations the command \thematrix does not show all its
arguments correctly: some parts are omitted in the typeset formula. In some
occasions adding some groupings solves the issue, but not always. I
Hi Hans,
I noticed that in some situations the command \thematrix does not show all its
arguments correctly: some parts are omitted in the typeset formula. In some
occasions adding some groupings solves the issue, but not always. I noticed
this bug two weeks ago, but could not produce
Thank you Hans!
Alignment works again as expected and documented in the Wiki.
Greetings Lutz
Am 23.02.2023 um 14:53 schrieb Hans Hagen via ntg-context:
On 2/18/2023 3:04 PM, Mikael Sundqvist via ntg-context wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 3:01 PM Lutz Haseloff via ntg-context
wrote:
On 2/18/2023 3:04 PM, Mikael Sundqvist via ntg-context wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 3:01 PM Lutz Haseloff via ntg-context
wrote:
Hi Hans, hi all,
the alignment of formulas seems broken:
\setuppapersize[A5]
\starttext
\setuplayout[textwidth=8cm]
\setupformulas[align=left]
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 3:01 PM Lutz Haseloff via ntg-context
wrote:
>
> Hi Hans, hi all,
>
> the alignment of formulas seems broken:
>
> \setuppapersize[A5]
> \starttext
> \setuplayout[textwidth=8cm]
> \setupformulas[align=left]
> \startformula c^2 = a^2 + b^2 \stopformula
>
Hi Hans, hi all,
the alignment of formulas seems broken:
\setuppapersize[A5]
\starttext
\setuplayout[textwidth=8cm]
\setupformulas[align=left]
\startformula c^2 = a^2 + b^2 \stopformula
o obtain high quality
> > documents. I'm a theoretical physicist and I'm going to write a book. I
> > think ConTeXt is the right choice to work with a number of formulas,
> > figures and cross-references. The visual quality of formulas is better
> > than in regular LaTeX. The new feat
of formulas,
figures and cross-references. The visual quality of formulas is better
than in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula autosplitting looks
also very promising. For me it is important to obtain the high quality
without a lot of manual tweaks of each formula for each given document
rences. The visual quality of formulas is
> better than in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula
> autosplitting looks also very promising. For me it is important to
> obtain the high quality without a lot of manual tweaks of each
> formula for each given document format and figu
of formulas is better than
in regular LaTeX. The new feature with formula autosplitting looks also
very promising. For me it is important to obtain the high quality without a
lot of manual tweaks of each formula for each given document format and
figure placement.
However, I have found a problem
around
>>> the math axis, as explained in the article. For instance in the following
>>> example
>>>
>>> \setupbodyfont[lucidaot,12pt]
>>> \starttext
>>> \startformula
>>> f(x) := -(u|x) := - \langle u, x \rangle
>>> \stopform
\startformula
f : A \longrightarrow B
\stopformula
\stoptext
it seems to me that the lower dot (or square…) in the semicolumn of the first
formula (in front of the equal sign) is lower than in the second formula.
Best regards: Otared
Thank you for the kind words, Otared,
Regarding the colons
x \rangle
> \stopformula
> \stopformula
> \startformula
> f : A \longrightarrow B
> \stopformula
> \stoptext
>
> it seems to me that the lower dot (or square…) in the semicolumn of the first
> formula (in front of the equal sign) is lower than in the second formula.
>
>
of the first
formula (in front of the equal sign) is lower than in the second formula.
Best regards: Otared
> On 23 Jan 2023, at 09:39, Henning Hraban Ramm via ntg-context
> wrote:
>
> https://tug.org/pipermail/lucida/2023-January/000921.html
>
> A new version (1.901) of the Lucida O
” added into the
formula (“c3” was the anchor’s tag).
MWE and unexpected output below.
Thanks,
Gavin
\starttext
\startboxanchoring[+]
\connectboxanchors[top][top][distance=1ex,arrow=no] {c1}{c2}
%\connectboxanchors[bottom] [bottom] [distance=1ex,arrow=no] {c2}{c3} % <-- I
deci
Hi Hans, MIkael and list,
I got an unexpected result when I asked for a \mathboxanchored, but then did
not use it with a connector. I expected the \mathboxanchored contents to be
typeset as usual, without a connector. Instead I got “ ::: c3” added into the
formula (“c3” was the anchor’s tag
{\ctxlua{context(sfnum)}} % ConTeXt can call the count from Lua to use
as an ID for each equation.
% Spin formulas increase the spin formula count and typeset the formula as
usual.
\define\startspinformula{
\ctxlua{sfnum = sfnum + 1}
\startformula
}
\define\stopspinformula{\stopformula}
% My
more Lua.
Gavin
% Lua counts the spin formulas
\ctxlua{sfnum = 0} % Count starts at zero
\def\sfID{\ctxlua{context(sfnum)}} % ConTeXt can call the count from Lua to use
as an ID for each equation.
% Spin formulas increase the spin formula count and typeset the formula as
usual.
\define
On 12/6/2022 12:39 AM, Gavin via ntg-context wrote:
Hello List,
I am working on a project which combines graphics with formulas, like this:
My code for creating this formula is attached. It works well, but I have a
couple of questions that could make it work better.
1) Is there a mathematics
Hello List,
I am working on a project which combines graphics with formulas, like this:
hposQuestion.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
My code for creating this formula is attached. It works well, but I have a
couple of questions that could make it work better.
1) Is there a mathematics
Hi List,
I am getting better at adjusting the space in enumerations, but I just put a
formula inside an enumeration, and the formula’s vertical spacing became
excessive. I’m not sure how the enumeration caused this problem.
\starttext
Evaluate the following derivatives.
\startitemize[n
to the necessary
table? If this is not the problem, I’m open to any other insight or advice.
Thanks,
Gavin
> On Oct 8, 2022, at 11:59 AM, Gavin wrote:
>
> Hi list,
>
> I made a small example with all of the issues I am trying to fix for the
> \units command. The first formula below uses
Hi list,
I made a small example with all of the issues I am trying to fix for the \units
command. The first formula below uses the \unit command, but produces strange
spacing. The second formula produces the desired spacing, without using the
\unit command.
\showmakeup[mathglue
ssive,
especially when the number is in a formula.
\startformula
\digits {12,345.67e89} + \digits {12,345.67e89}
\stopformula
I would like the \quotation{$\times$} to also be an \quotation{ord} when used
for scientific notation.
\sto
Dear Hans,
>> Thank you for your explanation.
>> I just wonder \alinghere can be applicable to multiple formula.
>> It is OK to use \NC \NR for multiple formulas.
> What probably can be done, is to let the next formula start with the align of
> the previous one .. Mikae
On 9/24/2022 4:51 PM, Jeong Dal via ntg-context wrote:
Dear Aditya, Mikael,
Thank you for your explanation.
I just wonder \alinghere can be applicable to multiple formula.
It is OK to use \NC \NR for multiple formulas.
What probably can be done, is to let the next formula start with the
align
Dear Aditya, Mikael,
Thank you for your explanation.
I just wonder \alinghere can be applicable to multiple formula.
It is OK to use \NC \NR for multiple formulas.
Best regards,
Dalyoung
___
If your question
the case. These formulas are done for single chain
equations. The example given above consists of two formulas, and the
new broken formula type simply does not fit. You can play with more
than one \alignhere, but they will only set new align points. I think
\startalign ... \stopalign is the way to g
ntg.nl>> a écrit :
> Dear List!
>
> I do not know how to solve this issue.
>
> I want the formulas appear on same height, as you can se on the attachment
> the formula containing a fraction displaces on another vertical position
> compared to the other equations.
>
>
12:57, Jan-Erik Hägglöf via ntg-context <
ntg-context@ntg.nl> a écrit :
> Dear List!
>
> I do not know how to solve this issue.
>
> I want the formulas appear on same height, as you can se on the attachment
> the formula containing a fraction displaces on another vert
Dear List!I do not know how to solve this issue.I want the formulas appear on same height, as you can se on the attachment the formula containing a fraction displaces on another vertical position compared to the other equations.How do I correct this?Code snippet pasted from garden\starttext
On 8/21/2022 1:04 AM, Adam Reviczky via ntg-context wrote:
Since there has been a lot of work done on the math side of things, I
wanted to ask if there is an automated way to have binary operators
repeated when splitting a formula.
From the MKIV math manual there is an option to move
Hi,
Since there has been a lot of work done on the math side of things, I
wanted to ask if there is an automated way to have binary operators
repeated when splitting a formula.
From the MKIV math manual there is an option to move the operators into the
new line:
\setupmathematics[setups
On 7/21/2022 8:42 PM, Pablo Rodriguez via ntg-context wrote:
I guess there has been no newer release since Hans anonunced that.
Indeed, for personal reasons no change yet to upload ... will happen one
of these days (Mikael and I also need to check some things first).
Hans
On 7/21/22 19:48, Alan via ntg-context wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 09:10:07 +0200
> Hans Hagen via ntg-context wrote:
>
>> there will be an update as soon as the mac intel bins are generated
>
> (still broken)
Sorry, Alan, but I get from
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:40:01 -0600
Alan via ntg-context wrote:
> undefined link location
> MWE:
>
> \setupinteraction [state=start]
>
> \starttext
>
> \placeformula [eq]
> \startformula
> x = 0
> \stopformula
>
> \page [yes]
>
undefined link location
MWE:
\setupinteraction [state=start]
\starttext
\placeformula [eq]
\startformula
x = 0
\stopformula
\page [yes]
\in{formula} [eq]
\stoptext
___
If your question
t;
> Thanks for reporting! We must have missed this one while testing. It
> should be fixed.
>
> If you for the moment can live without splitting, then this seems to
> give you the formula number where expected:
>
> \placeformula
> \startformula[location=left,split=no,numbe
is one line above the formula. Here is a minimal example:
>
> % begin bug-placeformula-left.tex
> \setupformulas[location=left]
>
> \starttext
>
> \placeformula
> \startformula
> a^2 + b^2 = c^2.
> \stopformula
>
> \stoptext
> % end bug-placeformula-left.tex
>
>
Dear Hans, dear Mikael,
In my experiments with the new math engine, I noticed that there is an issue
with \placeformula when one sets the location of the numbers on the left: the
number is one line above the formula. Here is a minimal example:
% begin bug-placeformula-left.tex
\setupformulas
solution for breaking inline math
however, in lmtx these do break across lines but there are of course
still cases where the penalties injected will discourage it; there is
agranular penalty system in place but current it is configured as
traditional tex
now, when a formula doesn't break
=(,right=),text=]
\def\eqref#1{\informula[eq:#1]}
\starttext
Using \type{\startmathfenced} and \type{\startalign} we can number each
equation, but the left brace is too far from the formula:
\startplaceformula
\startformula
\startmathfenced[cases]
\startalign[n=3,align={1:right,2:left,3:left}]
\NC
s still not possible to number
> > each equation, but I may be overlooking something. I’ll try a few examples
> > and will let you know, as well as Hans.
>
> Hm, but a cases environment does not provide several formulas. This is
> just one formula:
>
> \startformula
>
1 - 100 of 1271 matches
Mail list logo
