mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[Álvaro Tejero Cantero <address@hidden>]

Hello all,

  I know, especially for i and e (maybe I should create
 macros \i, \e and \d); this happened to me for one paper
 (published by Elsevier). However, a few weeks ago, a
 friend of mine made the same remark and I have looked at a
 few dozen of books from different publishers in my
 personal library; none of them used this convention.


Perhaps in part because they didn't have TeXmacs at their 
fingertips... ;). If "d" should be roman for notational 
consistence with other operators, then, traditions and 
conventions aside, IMHO TeXmacs should facilitate this more 
elegant style. My 0.02eur.


Other thing
-----------------
Have you ever thought about making "Spacebar" bound to 
product, instead of *?. This would need a change in the 
other math bindings, but has two arguments in its favor:

 -- We keep typing all the day products, spacebar is bigger 
and better placed.

 -- WYSIWYG: after all, if you make a product you get an 
small space; the current binding is __anti__ WYSIWYG, 
because you type space and you get nothing.

 -- more similar to what people already know. 

My point is that typing products is so common that should 
be thought as the default between monocharacter symbols.

Anyway, please tell how do you see this,

cheers, álvaro

-- 
álvaro.tejero.cantero
alqua.com, la red en estudio