On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 06:53:45PM -0500, Karl Berry wrote:
> Hi Patrice,
>
> Your criticisms of the @math documentation are well-founded.
>
> since makeinfo removes matching braces { }.
>
> I never exactly realized that. Seems unfortunate, since then
> @math{a^{bc}} comes out ambiguously?!
Indeed. Maybe this is a bug then.
> @-commands are used in @math
>
> True enough. I was thinking of something like @math{\sigma}, where (I
> believe) you have to use \sigma and not @sigma, but had neglected to
> think about normal Texinfo @-commands.
>
> 'it does not try to interpret the mathematics formatting in any special
>
> That wording doesn't seem right, but I can agree with the underlying
> point.
You'll have to redo the wording in any case...
> What I'd really like to do with @math is support it -- that is, add all
> the mathematical symbol commands to Texinfo, super/subscripts
> etc. However, that's obviously not going to happen any time soon, so I
What I do currently in texi2html is to use httexi to format the @math.
Maybe something similar could be done by makeinfo, too?
> agree it'd be good to document what really happens now. I was more or
> less intentionally glossing over the details since I knew the whole
> command was rather insufficient.
That's a good reason not to document too much. I won't add the brace
stuff since it is not obvious that it is right.
--
Pat
