[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 328 bytes --] how to insert fraction & integration in emacs .org file eg. test.org \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{x^2-1} when I export it into html using org-export-as-html it gives test.html \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{x2-1} I am new to org-mode. can anyone tell me whether I am inserted equation in right way?? Thanks & Regards, Supriya Pravin Sawant [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 474 bytes --]

```
Hi Supriya,
Supriya Sawant <sp.sawant14@gmail.com> writes:
> how to insert fraction & integration in emacs .org file
>
> eg. test.org
>
> \frac{1}{2}
> \sqrt{x^2-1}
>
> when I export it into html using org-export-as-html it gives
>
> test.html
>
> \frac{1}{2}
> \sqrt{x^2-1}
>
> I am new to org-mode.
> can anyone tell me whether I am inserted equation in right way??
Use the LaTeX syntax directly: $...$ to inline them and $$...$$ to
center them in the page. This works both in LaTeX and HTML.
#+TITLE: Test
$\frac{1}{2}$ and $\sqrt{x^2-1}$
or
$$\frac{1}{2}$$
$$\sqrt{x^2-1}$$
HTH,
--
Bastien
```

Bastien <bzg@altern.org> wrote: > Hi Supriya, > > Supriya Sawant <sp.sawant14@gmail.com> writes: > > > how to insert fraction & integration in emacs .org file > > > > eg. test.org > > > > \frac{1}{2} > > \sqrt{x^2-1} > > > > when I export it into html using org-export-as-html it gives > > > > test.html > > > > \frac{1}{2} > > \sqrt{x^2-1} > > > > I am new to org-mode. > > can anyone tell me whether I am inserted equation in right way?? > > Use the LaTeX syntax directly: $...$ to inline them and $$...$$ to > center them in the page. This works both in LaTeX and HTML. > > #+TITLE: Test > > $\frac{1}{2}$ and $\sqrt{x^2-1}$ > > or > > $$\frac{1}{2}$$ > > $$\sqrt{x^2-1}$$ > This may work for org, but $$...$$ in particular does not work for LaTeX. I would recommend that you don't use these delimiters: use \( ... \) for inlines and \[...\] for displays. $$...$$ is plain TeX, not LaTeX, and according to Lamport (p. 233), "... does not work properly." See also http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=dolldoll Nick

```
Hi Nick,
Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:
> $$...$$ is plain TeX, not LaTeX, and according to Lamport (p. 233),
> "... does not work properly." See also
>
> http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=dolldoll
$$...$$ worked for me for years in LaTeX (using tetex on GNU/Linux)
so I'm curious: is this FAQ entry still accurate? The web page says
"2012-03-29" but maybe that's just an automated time-stamp, not telling
whether this entry in particular is still relevant.
Anyway, thanks for the pointer, learning every day!
--
Bastien
```

```
Bastien <bzg@altern.org> wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:
>
> > $$...$$ is plain TeX, not LaTeX, and according to Lamport (p. 233),
> > "... does not work properly." See also
> >
> > http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=dolldoll
>
> $$...$$ worked for me for years in LaTeX (using tetex on GNU/Linux)
> so I'm curious: is this FAQ entry still accurate? The web page says
> "2012-03-29" but maybe that's just an automated time-stamp, not telling
> whether this entry in particular is still relevant.
>
> Anyway, thanks for the pointer, learning every day!
>
I don't know for sure, but I presume it's still valid: I abandoned
$$...$$ many years ago after reading Lamport and have used \[...\]
ever since. The breakage seems subtle, so why chance it?
Nick
```

>>>>> "bzg" == Bastien <bzg@altern.org> writes: bzg> Hi Nick, Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes: >> $$...$$ is plain TeX, not LaTeX, and according to Lamport (p. >> 233), "... does not work properly." See also >> >> http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=dolldoll bzg> $$...$$ worked for me for years in LaTeX (using tetex on bzg> GNU/Linux) so I'm curious: is this FAQ entry still accurate? bzg> The web page says "2012-03-29" but maybe that's just an bzg> automated time-stamp, not telling whether this entry in bzg> particular is still relevant. It is, but the reasons are not so obvious. You can find some arguments here : <http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/21173/display-math-deadly-sin-in-l2tabu> In short : - without amsmath (but who does not load amsmath?), vertical spacing is wrong in some circumstances (which should never happen anyway : a displayed equation can never begin a new paragraph), and - with amsmath, some other problems remain, most notably the global option "fleqn" (flush left equations) does not work. In general, $$ should never be modified by any package, so if you load a package that should do something with displayed equations, you'd better not use $$ $$. Unfortunately I don't know which packages are in this situation. So, is it worth changing your code ? I personally never use $$ (nor \[ \]) (i) because I like having meaningful environment names, (ii) because I was taught not to use them, and (iii) because amsmath makes it easy to change a environement into another (e.g. change between numbered/unnumbered, or change between {equation} and {align}). -- Nicolas.