On 20/03/2012 10:43 a.m., stefano franchi wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Richard Heck<[email protected]> wrote:
On 03/19/2012 04:26 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:57:37 -0400
Richard Heck<[email protected]> wrote:
On 03/19/2012 12:17 PM, paul sutton wrote:
27,underfull \hbox (badness 10,000) in paragraph
31,underfull \hbox (badness 10,000) in paragraph
31underfull \hbox (badness 10,000) in paragraph
These are warnings that LaTeX had to stretch the inter-word spacing
more than it would like to do in order to fill the line. The first is
the first paragraph of the Introduction and is probably caused by the
newline, so you can ignore it. The second is the first line of the
next paragraph, and if you look at it you can see how it is kind of
stretched out. The way to fix it is to re-write the line a bit, or
just not to bother.
One man's opinion: If you ever start tweaking content to satisfy
format, you'd might as well switch from LyX to Scribus or some other
coffee-table-book-authoring-tool.
This is a pure typesetting issue. I'm perfectly happy to re-write a line a
teeny bit to get a better break, so it will look right.
Or you can take it all the way, as philosopher/cognitive scientist
Hofstadter. See enclosed png (I am too lazy to retype the quote and
Amazon does not allow me to capture the fragment as text).
Cheers,
S.
Thank you for the Hofstadter quote Stefano. When I first came into
contact with equation editor in Word 95 in 1996 I became aware that it
was much harder to use a slap-dash argument, much harder to deceive
myself about the quality of an argument, when faced with an elegantly
typeset equation.
Andrew
