mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

["Andrey G. Grozin" <address@hidden>]

Hello *,

On Fri, 23 May 2003, Joris van der Hoeven wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2003, Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 May 2003, David Allouche wrote:
> > > This issue is probably related to the larger (mathml related) issue of
> > > math grammar. For example, in your document it would be useful to
> > > identify logically those "structure constants" and have the typesetter
> > > automatically render commas in superscripts as InvisbleComma.
> > But not if my indices are n and -1, then I want the comma to be visible!
> Hmm, interesting point. I guess that we should be able to detect this
> using our grammar. Not only spacing would then be grammar-dependent,
> but also the actual appearance of certain symbols. What would be
> the precise rule? For instance, how to render indices n and 1?
I think the user should choose. I just think that it would be annoying it 
I type , and get InvisibleComma instead. There should by some distinct way 
to input InvisibleComma.

But the rule I have in my mind is in fact rather simple. It's OK to 
concatenate indices if all of them are single symbols. f_{n1m2} seems OK 
for me. If at least one index is an expression, like in f_{n,-1} or
f_{2,n+1} , then they should be separated by (visible) commas.

Andrey