From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: Exponents / subscripts Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:06:53 +0200 Message-ID: <87fveh89wi.fsf@gmx.us> References: <87zjcs0yxw.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87k33v13g5.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <8761fenzxi.fsf@gmx.us> <87y4s9mlef.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57140) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xgfhv-0001ii-VF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:07:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xgfhq-0008BY-WF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:07:03 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:56872) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xgfhq-0008BM-KV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:06:58 -0400 Received: from W530 ([217.130.110.20]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LtJ5T-1Y8sxf3LNT-012tF8 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:06:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87y4s9mlef.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of "Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:34:48 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Rasmus writes: > >> Nicolas Goaziou writes: >> >>> Fabrice Popineau writes: >>> >>>> Given that it is only a matter of presentation, does that mean it coul= d be >>>> changed ? >>>> If yes, I can try to give it a shot. >>> >>> If you mean that a^bc should be equivalent to a^{b}c, then I think it is >>> superior in its current state. >> >> As I understand Fabrice's mail, it's only about display of scripts in >> Org buffers (when org-pretty-entities-include-sub-superscripts is >> non-nil). So rather than displaying >> >> (+) \(a^nb^n\) >> >> as >> >> \(a=E2=81=BF=E1=B5=87=E2=81=BF\) >> >> it would be displayed as >> >> (*) \(a=E2=81=BFb=E2=81=BF\) >> >> Of course, it /only/ makes sense to change how it is displayed in >> math-mode, for which (*) is the more accurate depiction of (+). > > If we're talking about math mode, then I think no overlay should be > added on them, and let `org-toggle-inline-images' display them > correctly. IOW, \(a^nb^n\) should be displayed as \(a^nb^n\). > > It is, IMO, a bug in the current fontification, in which sub/superscript > handling leaks over math snippets. I disagree. org-toggle-inline-images and fontification of *scripts is are complements at best. org-toggle-inline-images is slow and inconvenient for anything but finished documents. Had preview-latex supported Org I'd maybe agree, but I disagree strongly at this time. sub/superscript works well with entities and makes it very easy to edit math and get approximate live feedback. IOW and IMO, the "bug", if any, is the fontification of superscript in math. =E2=80=94Rasmus --=20 To err is human. To screw up 10=E2=81=B6 times per second, you need a compu= ter