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
