On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:20 AM, Mojca Miklavec
<mojca.miklavec.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 00:12, Marco wrote:
>> On 2011-12-07 Mojca Miklavec wrote:
>>
>>> > \unit{3.4e-5}   yields   to  3.4⁻⁵   that's   expected
>>> > according to the manual.
>>>
>>> But the behaviour is wrong.
>>
>> I don't know if it's wrong.
>
> But 5e3 would render 5^3 which is hopefully still 125.
>
>> It's very non-intuitive, but I
>> think Hans had a reason not to include the \cdot 10.
>
> \cdot 10^{x} is pretty long and might be ugly. But writing out
> exponent without the base is everything but the right approach. Even
> writing out 5e3 is better than that.
>
> Mojca
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
> Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
> archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
> wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________

I've seen many people writing 5e3 to mean 5·10³, but I've never seen
5e3 to mean 5³.

The writing 5e3 = 5·10³ is sometimes called the E-notation [1]. Even
though I would never write it like that myself, I vote that 5e3 will
render as 5·10³ (or with \times instead of \cdot).

Best regards, Mikael

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_notation#E_notation

PS One could ask, however, if this really belongs to a unit package.
In my world it does not, but I can understand if it is convenient to
have there.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to