@PauloCereda The Workplace SE has been launched. The design is awesome!
@egreg well, it really depends. In the utmost technical part of the work (which sometimes happens to be very technical if you do combinatorics), I prefer enumerating. Outside of this part, I prefer not to number the statements at all
@PauloCereda well, that's somehow the point of the design. I just think they should put a bit more of a design into the tags, and it'll be fine :) (I tought about tags as postits)
@HarishKumar you can shout to each other through the earth surface: if you spread the waves equally in all directions, they meet again at the other side :)
@HarishKumar if you fell down, you'd be "falling" until @Paulo's place for 84 minutes. You would have stopped at the Earth surface. Should you have not manage to hold the orifice of the hole, you'd fall back in :)
@HarishKumar and be sure you've no friction in the tunnel, or you just eventually end in the middle of the Earth, and it knows to be quite warm down there :)
any one knows a way to enable me to use imperial units as well as SI in the same document using \usepackage{siunitx}? For example, I'd like to do \SI{9.20}{\square\meter} = \SI{100}{square ft} but ofcourse this does not work, as \SI does not know about \ft, so can't do \SI{9.20}{\square\meter} = \SI{100}{\square\ft} is there a way to do this using the same package or do I need to use the units package?
may be I need to use \DeclareSIUnit{} but do not know how to use it now.
The question Why use a package to typeset units? made me think about something else: In non-scientific context one may have to provide data for persons using ... imperial units (shiver). But there may be two versions of a report, or the desire to put a secondary unit in parentheses following the ...
I do not want to "switch" units, I want to just say this is 100 meters = something feet, etc... I just want to use it for annotation. Before I was typing units using \text{} and it did not look good. This looks much nicer now
btw, the above image was just an example., the numbers ofcourse do not make sense :)
That was a good link. I can't believe all these years I was typing units using \text{..} when this package was around ! Now I need to go edit all the documents I have and change everything to using this package :)
@PeterGrill I found that I can just write \DeclareSIUnit\ft{ft} and this works as well. i.e. no need to have the names different as in \DeclareSIUnit\feet{ft} . It looks like it just wanted to know that ft is a symbol so one can use \ft that is all. I am using this package now for all my units...
I found a big problem with \usepackage{siunitx} with tex4ht. But first I'd like to ask, I can use this in math mode or outside math mode, right? Since pdflatex has no problem with either of these:
There seems many things that Tex can do automatically to make it easier to use, but it does not. One example: One has to tell it \left( .... \right) to get the correct size "()" depending on the expression inside. But why can't one just write (....) and let Tex figure the correct size as it does in the first case above on its own? I mean, it is a program? Can it not calculate the size and do the right thing?
If I was writing Tex myself, that is what I would do. It makes tex code very hard to read when one has to write \left( and \right) instead of just () . I wonder if there is a macro one can use to make each ( and each ) expand to \left( and \right) automatically? Any expert here can do this?
@Johannes_B thanks will look at it. But my question is really simple. I'd rather just write ( \frac{a}{b} ) than \left( \frac{a}{b} \right) and I was wondering is there is a macro one can define to write () and have that expand automatically when build.
This way, I do not have to worry about the size of () depending on "a" or "b" size. Btw, this is what Scientific word does. It only uses \left( \right) for everything !
But it makes the code hard to read !
@Johannes_B I am looking at the physics package now. It looks nice and I could use it. But I do not see how it does expand () to the right size automatically? It seem one has to use a command \qty() or such?
@Johannes_B hum... I am really a niewbie in Latex. All want I wanted, is to write () and have macro expand that to \left( and \right) during build time. that is all.
so that code is easier to read and write but at the same time, it builds as if I wrote \left and \right)
@Nasser As long as you are prepared to get bad output, you can do whatever you want. SWP's idea of always adding \left and \right is much more than wrong: it's stupid.
@egreg why will the output be bad? isn't \left( 10 \right) the same output as ( 10 ) ?
SWP generates all code like this. That is why it is hard to read. So if there is a macro to use at the top, this will make the code much easier to read.
@Nasser No, it isn't the same: horizontal spacing can be different. If a software does stupid things, I'd simply throw away the software. But what will a macro do, if SWP continues to write \left and \right?
@egreg I am trying to write my own Latex now, and that is why I asked. I want to write () instead of \left( and \right) myself. I am trying to see if I can do my own Latex instead of using SW
@egreg I know that, but that is my point ! I have to run the code, then find I needed the big () so I have to edit it. and if I change the code later, now the () might not fit, so have to change them. Software should not work like this. It should be automatic and use the right size () on its own.
"I continue to believe that one should use \left and \right where really needed and any sort of automatism for this is bad." tex.stackexchange.com/questions/94410/… :)
I see now how you feel about this :)
@egreg Your code is too advanced for me to understand how to do this. You think this will make a good question to ask on the main board? How to write this macro using this mathtool ? I really do not understand it at all.
@Nasser You just need some experience in typing math. Then you usually know when delimiters should grow. An automatized system can have its merits when the code is generated by the machine; but forget about good typography, in that case.
@egreg I am trying to edit the source code generated by SW so that I can take it from there on my own and not use SW. But it is hard to read. So I am trying to remove all the \left( and \right) and replacing them with () to make it little easier to read.
This is just one small example of the code generated that I have to look at.
@Nasser I commented on your question, but in siunitx manual is stated that siunitx always print content in text mode with tex4ht, so that could be source of your problem, as html elements appear in mathml code and that cause validation error
@michal.h21 thanks. I asked here before if I can use siunitx in math mode as well as outside and was told yes. But I guess not with tex4ht. I have to use it in math mode, since I have many equations in math mode with units. I guess I have to go back to using png for math and not use mathml+mathjax :(
Yes, I have to use it in math really, no way around that. I guess if there is no solution, I'll just switch back to .png even thought I think mathjax math looks better.
that is nice! I do not know how you did this. So, I guess this is how it is supposed to work. Ok. I still think the tan is little high, but if this is how it is supposed to be. Life goes on.
actually my undergraduate degree is from England, from Liverpool univ (Civil Eng) and I had no idea they write meter the wrong way. I must have forgotten this.
Ok, if I am to stop using Scientific word, I need at least a live preview Latex. I spend many hrs on emacs/auctex and can't get the live preview to work. gnu.org/software/auctex/preview-latex.html my question is: Has any body here used this setup? does it actually work? The other option I have is to buy a mac and install texshop with flashmode which is supposed to do live preview. I need to see the math as I type else I will go crazy
@egreg sorry, can't do it. I have to see the actual math. I spend 1 hr to write something that I could have written in 2 minutes using Scientific word. My mind works with GUI, I have to see the math as I type.
you folks here must have special mind to be able to type all this math without seeing it in 2D as you type it. May be I will go try Lyx again. I tried it few times, but never liked it that much.
Doing lots of typesetting, I found myself being able to edit LaTeX markup into a 12-page article in Word full of math, to find out that I only forgot to include \end{bibliography} at the very end. But that's only because I do dozens of pieces a year
@Nasser With very complicated math equations/environments/etc, I will often use one of the many live previewers that only do math that are available. Most of these are free to boot, and they will put out decent TeX code. (Some things could be made simpler, but it 'works'.)
Well, you can as well use life preview of MathJaX like the one at Math.SE, since for most things MathJaX is enough and produces output very similar to LaTeX's.
@Nasser I can be a data point to say that the preview functionality in AUCTeX works very well, but I'm not convinced you know exactly how it functions. When you finish typing the code for the math, all emacs does is send that to TeX, convert it to PNG, and put it in your buffer. It's not a 2D editor.
@tohecz i saw Jun 19 conversation on chat room, between Jake and Rico related with Michaelis Menten curve fit which is related with enzyme activity measurement
@PauloCereda well, I have set the recording level too low, so I had to scale it up during conversion, which makes the quality bad. As well, the guy with the guitar (our minister) stood close to the microphones, whereas the piano is quite further away
actually i want to discuss (exactly to ASK hehehe) with Jake and Rico related with Michaelis Menten curve fitting during their discussion on June 19.. it seem i could not :( my reputation is below than 20.
@PauloCereda Sort-of. At home I can use mum's, but back in Norwich I'll just have my work PC until the laptop is fixed. I'm currently on the MacBook using the recovery system!
I'd planned to do some LaTeX stuff whil in the hotel over the weekend. Didn't come off, but I did re-read Programming in Lua (need to get the latest version)
@egreg How is the expl3 book going?
@PauloCereda One annoying thing with the laptop issue is that I'd done some work on Thursday/Friady on some expl3 stuff, but hadn't copied to my memory stick. So that will all have to be redone :-(
@percusse Hello! Another try with the recorder, however, I had to scale the sound, I made a too low input volume setting: http://kmlinux.fjfi.cvut.cz/~hejdato1/temp/tascam-dr-05-test-tohecz-2.mp3
@tohecz Just piss off a teenage girl and let her shout during the song. Or let a celebrity enter the room, hmm, I have no idea what is cool for teenagers these days
@percusse well, at home, I can try high notes on my digital piano, but that's not optimal. The church organ and 2' registers with mixture pipes might be better :)
I was thinking more that the reason these sites are (or are not) successful is very much 'fashion', and the worries of a relatively small number of IT-literate folk make little difference
@JosephWright Yes I'm taking these very very lightly. But super fun to watch nevertheless. Imagine the panic of the poor IT guys in Telegram offices :)
On another news if someone ever claims that TeX is terrible and should be like new programming languages, I'll put their emails on any spam list I can find.
@JosephWright I had the very same problem with kvoptions: I was unable to read the manual, but once I knew how to use the package, it is great. Now, I have the same problem with kvsetkeys: The manual is simply completely messy, and contains no useful information and no reasonable examples (at least that's my impression)
@JosephWright well, I've never used setkeys. The problem of all these packages is that they're so new that many people just don't have a reasonable version in their LaTeX. And these people are very stubborn considering getting new LaTeX.
@tohecz I'd say it's actually quite good: it works exactly as it says it does. However, you do have to do much of the work yourself (it was designed for one task)
what I don't like is that none of the packages provide good bool handling: I would like to have something like reset@family -- without it, it seems to be quite fragile
@JosephWright well, you have String and Boolean options for your command, and they default to something. When you execute the command, you want to be sure they default to something
I would really love the very same interface as kvoptions provides, just intended for use with commands
@DavidCarlisle yes, but imagine you use \x[a=true,b=false] \x[y] \x[a=false,b=false] \x[y] -- then in each of the calls of \x[y] you have a different value of the boolean a
@tohecz It would be pretty weird if \includegraphics[scale=2]{} caused all following graphics to be scaled, but it is the \includegraphics command not the keyval system that ensures that the settings are local
@DavidCarlisle well, there could be a better interface for that. I know, that's what l3keys is for (WIP), or pgfkeys (mess in progress)
@DavidCarlisle no, because Heiko's manual makes less than zero sense without knowing that the command \define@key even exists. Heiko doesn't mention it any single time :-/
@tohecz kvoptions just grew of course: the keyval system was up and running and the sebastian wanted to use the syntax in the option parsing of hyperref and hacked something, so Heiko hacked something a bit cleaner but it can't be very clean as the package option handling isn't really designed for that syntax, then that bit of heiko's email became a package in its own right:-)
@DavidCarlisle yeah, I somehow get it. Still, the manuals are strange (with no intention to say someone has done a bad job, nothing like that). But I have this problem quite often; TikZ/PGF is another example of that kind.
