mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[Phil Mendelsohn <address@hidden>]

On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 05:49:50PM +0200, Joris van der Hoeven wrote:

> OK, so that is really a problem with the eqnarray* environment.
> In TeX, the interline space seems to be larger for this particular
> environment. I fixed this for the next version.

I think you mean you changed TeXmacs 'equations' environment to be a
little closer to the eqnarray* (which does not have the problem).
Thanks!

> Well, my point is not that mundane; it occurs for all kinds of
> inline formulas which descend or ascend a bit too much.
> Think about inline fractions, to give another example.

I just checked, and I am not pleased with the interline spacing there
either.  Apparently TeXmacs adjusts the spacing when the cursor gets
to the descender in question.  Say you are putting the polynomial
expression \frac{1 - x^{m+1}}{1-x} at the end of a line.  When the
line wraps, the new line is set close to the previous one until the
cursor comes under the fraction.

If this line is shorter than the top one, then you end up with lines
that are not spaced in a typographically correct way -- they are
unbalanced.  The space for the next line should be augmented as soon
as a descender is placed, not when the cursor gets under it.

Even then, it appears that we're a little too stingy with interline
spacing.  I'd like to see about 5% more in _all_ of TeXmacs, I think.
It is a small detail, I know, but one that gives me pause when using
TeXmacs to generate finished products.

> Thanks for reporting these details. Don't hestitate to contact about
> typographic issues. The aim of TeXmacs is to provide a better
> typesetting quality than TeX.

As always, I'll do what I can to help.

Cheers,
Phil

-- 
"To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." -- Anonymous