Adam Lindsay wrote : > David Munger wrote: > > Adam Lindsay wrote : > >> David Munger wrote: > >>> Very interesting, but with these definitions, I can't get roman > >>> characters in formulae. For the moment, the best solution for me is > >>> still the hbox wrapper. > >> Okay. > >> What do you mean by "can't get roman characters"? Can you give an > >> minimal example? > >> > >> adam > > > > Sorry, I should have given one. > > > > \startmathcollection[default] > > \definemathcharacter [a] [nothing] [mi] ["61] > > \stopmathcollection > > > > \definetypeface [] [mm] [bfmath] [computer-modern] [computer-modern] > > \setupformulas [method=bold] > > > > \starttext > > \formula{a, {\rm a}, {\bfm a}, {\bfm\rm a}} > > \stoptext > > > > I can't get bold roman math. And by using [mr] instead of [mi]: > > \definemathcharacter [a] [nothing] [mr] ["61] > > one gets the inverse problem: no more bold math italic. > > oh, I see. I'll admit: all the maths I've dealt with don't require such > fine manual control over the fonts.

Well, sometimes it's useful when dealing with different kinds of objects such as vectors and tensors. > Would it be for individual characters? Would an approach like this work? > \formula{a, {\rm a}, {\bfm a}, \text{\bf a}} Yes, of course. This happens to be an \hbox. My point is simply that we have not come to a general solution yet, we are just finding different workarounds to suit our personal needs, which is not bad indeed. Cheers, David _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context