The package footmisx selfdescribes as "a fork of footmisc package allowing to use hyperref".
I'm confused for two reasons:
(1) This MWE throws the error Missing \begin{document}:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{footmisx}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\begin{document}
Some text. \footnote{Fo...
Is it possible to remove it from ctan or if that is impossible to add a strong warning that this package is broken (and illegal) and should not be used? Is it possible to delete it from github (inactive since two years). I do not know github and its rules.
@Kurt Removal from github is practically impossible AFAIK. Concerning CTAN, you need to give a good argumentation and contact the CTAN maintainers, it might be moved to obsolete branch.
@StefanKottwitz Could you please remove this comment. If you do not think this is necessary, please remove the whole post. I do not see why people can use strong overstatements in comments, and nobody cares.
I don't see strong language here. Assuming the usage of "bullshit" or so, I would agree with you. But "nonsense" is a common English word that I would not count under "strong". But anyway ...
@norbert It is the combination "most nonsense" and that the statement can be read in two ways. (Note that I agree content-wise to a large extent, I just do not want these phrases around. After all, this has been practice for a while. I have seen too many discussions that derailed.)
@norbert My main concern is that, given that this has been common practice, it is an IMHO unduly strong statement that rates the behavior of several users here in a way that I find not appropriate. Have you ever voted to close a question because it was solved in the comments?
@marmot I don't think it is particularly strong nor is the comment aimed at a person it's just stating correctly that "off topic as solved in comments" if parsed as English is nonsense even though that's what we often do due to the way the site rules are constructed.
One possible custom reason could be
Not generally applicable
which is close to the old 'Too localized' reason we used to use.
Many of the questions that closed after a comment trail or are 'do it for me' are probably only of real use to the person asking the question, but not more widely. ...
\addplot3[surf,smooth,mesh/ordering=y varies,shader=interp,samples=52,samples y=21,variable=t,domain=0:360,restrict z to domain=0:16] ({3*cos(t)},{3*sin(t)},{1});
To draw x^2+y^2=9 but it only gives me a circle at z=1
@DavidCarlisle you know you are contagious - the first answer my brain fired was "good for your diner" ;-). If this go on, I will start to write commands with zzz.
@CarLaTeX thanks! I know it is not okay to ask in the chat. I think that there is used ({cos(u)}, {max(v,abs(cos(u)))}, {sin(u)}) but I think there must be an easier way
@CarLaTeX because I know that you are very intelligent I thought that graphing a cylinder with a change of coordinates was going to be able to respond quickly (today I am slow to process information) :P
„Es gibt gute YouTube-Videos“, hat der Orthopäde gesagt. „Damit können Sie zu Hause trainieren.“
„Danke, schreiben Sie mir die mal auf?“
Hat er gemacht.
@Kurt Very estimated Kurt Saturday night and a little bit last night I felt like I was in Siberia :-). Generally the extreme south is not used to these cold temperatures. I live in a seaside village and in the hills (it is about 600 meters) it has snowed a lot. In the neighboring countries it also snowed but what created big problems was the strong wind almost at 100 km/h.
@Kurt The wind caused the fall of trees, poles of light and lighting. today I am writing to you because I had to be in service at school. The schools in my province should all be closed to check for any damage to the structures. You think that here in the south we are ignored because the Italian state does not invest and the structures are old and obsolete.
@Kurt For the book, I am very happy :-) it is a marvel day after day. At the moment I'm waiting for indications from a publishing house for approval. I send you my most affectionate greetings.
@PauloCereda good morning to you and the best regards with affection.
@Sebastiano It is very difficult to snow in my hometown too but suddenly it did snow last year and two years ago. I don't know why it did not snow this year.
@JosephWright @egreg In my school, if I sent my teacher a document with dx in it, my score would be reduced a little :) We prefer dx, and I think this depends on country.
@JouleV Crazy teachers doing so. One can give arguments that the d should be upright, but it does not matter, as long as people understand what you are writing.
@CarLaTeX It is just the statement that anyone ever closing a question in this way has done "most nonsense". To me this is an inappropriate comment on the practice.
@marmot -- This really is a matter of opinion, as already noted. "Solved in comments" by itself doesn't provide any useful information, so it doesn't make sense. The problem is that previously available reasons have been retracted by the management, to great detriment. @JosephWright's response to the question offers a possible improvement, although it's not perfect. "Solved in comments" is only a partial reason -- citing user error in addition would make it make sense.
@barbarabeeton I fully agree that it does not make sense. I am only really unhappy about the wording "most nonsense", which is IMHO unreasonably impolite.
@marmot -- I've just looked at the comment again, and it says only "nonsense", not "most nonsense". So perhaps it has been changed, and discussion at this point is no longer meaningful. Sorry for the noise.
@marmot sorry but that it is like the argument that a girl shouldn't use a lipstick as it is the first step into prostitution. The number of discussions which derailed is much smaller than the number of impolite remarks and more discussion derailed because someone mentioned "minimal example" in a comment than because an impolite remark.
@UlrikeFischer No. Lipstick is not a step towards prostitution. Using unnecessarily tough language is the first step to a derailing discussion. Tough wording should be spared for situations in which it is needed IMHO.
@marmot I really don't understand your objection at all. You should be polite to people but you don't have to be polite about conventions saying that closing something as off topic because it's solved in comments is nonsense is quite possibly literally true and certainly isn't rude to anyone whether or not the word "most" is there.
@UlrikeFischer -- Your picture the other day of marmot and bär looking out at the snow reminded me of one of my favorite videos: "Backcity Providence". It's about a couple of graduate students enjoying skiing in the city after a big snowstorm.
@DavidCarlisle I feel differently about that. Using such wording is not helpful in this discussion at all. (Imagine I would counter your argument you just made with "This is most nonsense".)
@marmot as I say it is different if you say it about a what a person has said. But I do not think politeness or impoliteness can apply if you are discussing the wording of a close option in a menu.
@DavidCarlisle I read it differently. First of all, this was a tough statement, and when one reads it quickly one feels that this is a comment on something I propose. It is not, but one has to read very carefully. And whoever has voted "off-topic because solved in the comments" has now deemed of having done "most nonsense". "Most" got removed, and I am OK with the revised wording.
@marmot oh :( :(. It was Sunday, some the people do not want to move from their houses
@marmot concerning to: tex.stackexchange.com/a/476607/152550 your last picture does not correspond to what I want; I want to see three different surfaces with three different solid colors (in the image I show the colors)
The following MWE closely reproduces a LaTeX file I created. I'm using @egreg's solution to my question about programatically creating dummy text.
The issue is that the quoted section on the second page is pushed to
the second page. I suppose this is because of the altered definition
of the quot...
I redefine the quoting environment using \tcolorboxenvironment. But now I want a different modified version of the quoting environment, while leaving that altered version in place for backward compatibility purposes. I thought I'd called the second one boxquoting. But I'm not sure how to do that.
Does this sound like a reasonable question to ask?
@egreg if you write dx then this could mean the name of a variable, and we know that dx is not a variable. The variable here is x and d is an operator, like lim, max, etc. which are upright. Hence, d must go upright
@egreg you have never seen a change of variables of u=dx
except when integration by parts is used, but that is for a reason, in general you do not replace dx by another variable, hence x is the variable. You do not write f(dx) but f(x)
@manooooh But we already discussed it. I won't change my mind. There are good objections to both styles. If you don't know about tangent bundles and all the differential geometry stuff, you won't go much beyond the silly “u=dx” objection.
@egreg what happens is that it is physically impossible to learn all the topics of mathematics, but the truth is that it is wrong to argue that in an integral the variable is dx, it is x, where d is an operator, like lim, max, gcd, etc.
Of course I do not want to change your mind, it is just an opinion I wanted to share with you
@egreg well, in a Calculus integral x is the variable, and d is an operator. Therefore, unless the context is clear, we should be able to distinguish that dx represent something and dx represents something different
So in the end you are right; it depends on the context
@egreg Yes, but the differential form has the d operator in it (or do you typeset the d in an exterior differential differently from the d in dx?). You can also have a variable \sin x w.r.t. which you can differentiate things, say, but you wouldn't write sinx in that case either.
@egreg Um, speaking from a modern viewpoint, there is no variable there. When you treat dx as a differential, x is a coordinate function, and dx is its differential.
And in ∫ f(x) dx, for consistency's sake, f(x) would need to be seen as a composition, which more commonly would be written f∘x. (The ∘ did not come out too well. It'c \circ.)
@marmot thank you very much for your interest! Once the surfaces have been established, the solid that forms between them must be filled. I have posted two alternatives: using patterns or filling it with a solid color, what takes you less work
@manooooh Why don't you draw the z=0 plane with \addplot3[surf,opacity=.5,domain=-4:4, domain y=-4:4, colormap={dull}{color=(cyan) color=(cyan)},opacity=0.5] {0};
@marmot No, not necessarily. As @egreg says, it is a matter of taste. Arguably, d is an operator, but it is different from operators like sin and cos – typographically, in that it is just a single letter. And that alone provides an argument for treating it differently. Some physics and engineering folks want to write the imaginary unit i and e=2.718218… also with upright letters, even though they aren't even operators. But I think it makes sense to treat e, i, d the same in typesetting. …
… except d gets a thin space in front, due to its operator status.
@marmot Clearly, i, e and d (and j and k, if you're into quaternions) have some special status that may entitle them to being written upright. But I don't feel any obligation to do so, unless I were to write for an audience that's used to this.
Hopefully, I will never succumb to the the temptation to raise e to the 2πii'th power …
@HaraldHanche-Olsen Well, personally I feel that he readability changes tremendously if you typeset those upright. And in physics it is not unheard of to have the i-th power of \exp(2\i\mathrm{i}/N), so e^{i2\pi i/N} really s***s.
@manooooh Honestly, I think a mesh is better. Patterns are always 2d and do not get transformed to lie on the surface, so the result will look poor (IMHO). So I would like to argue that you will be better off if you adjust the mesh parameters to your needs.
@mariogarcc I know nothing about the plugin you mention, sorry. I would mention that | |-- dist/ # here should go all the auxiliary files including synctex and fls is an anti-pattern as far as I'm concerned. It's possible to make tex write aux files to a different place but it complicates the setup for everything else, you need to configure, bibtex, makeindex, your editor, ... to find them.
@marmot Please, undelete your answer to that question. My comment was just an untested guess (and with no solid argument). Besides I'm a but busy today, so I can't write a proper answer :)
@marmot well, you are right about that the patterns should not go in 3d, but I do not like the mesh. I prefer (if possible) a solid texture (of course you can preserve the last MWE that you did in the answer)
@marmot well, using \addplot3[surf,shader=interp,colormap={dull}{color=(red) color=(red)},ultra thin,domain=0:360,domain y=0:4,z buffer=sort,samples=31,samples y=41] ({min(y,3)*cos(x)},{min(y,3)*sin(x)},{16-y*y}); I think the output is not very fancy :S :
@marmot it is beatiful, thank you so much for your effort!
The package footmisx selfdescribes as "a fork of footmisc package allowing to use hyperref".
I'm confused for two reasons:
(1) This MWE throws the error Missing \begin{document}:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{footmisx}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\begin{document}
Some text. \footnote{Fo...
One possible custom reason could be
Not generally applicable
which is close to the old 'Too localized' reason we used to use.
Many of the questions that closed after a comment trail or are 'do it for me' are probably only of real use to the person asking the question, but not more widely. ...
