CZ:Formatting mathematics: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Greg Martin
(new page)
 
imported>Greg Martin
Line 5: Line 5:
=== Use <nowiki><math></nowiki> environments instead of HTML markup ===
=== Use <nowiki><math></nowiki> environments instead of HTML markup ===


''Proposed policy:'' Always use a <nowiki><math></nowiki> environment when typesetting mathematics (for example, whenever a $ environment would be used in TeX), rather than using by-hand italics or HTML markup.
''Proposed policy:'' Always use a <nowiki><math></nowiki> environment when typesetting mathematics (for example, whenever a $ environment would be used in TeX), rather than using by-hand italics or HTML markup. [[CZ:Formatting mathematics/Use math environments|(discuss this)]]


=== The <math>dx</math> in integrals ===
=== The <math>dx</math> in integrals ===

Revision as of 15:04, 10 May 2007

this page: CZ policy (either established by consensus or under debate) for how to format mathematics in CZ articles

Issues for all <math> environments

Use <math> environments instead of HTML markup

Proposed policy: Always use a <math> environment when typesetting mathematics (for example, whenever a $ environment would be used in TeX), rather than using by-hand italics or HTML markup. (discuss this)

The in integrals

Proposed policy: Insert a "thin space" \, before any -type object in an integral or differential; let the <math> environment typeset it in normal math font, rather than altering it. (discuss this)

Proposed good examples: and

Proposed bad examples: and

Issues for display <math> environments

Indentation

Policy: Use a single colon to indent a displayed equation. (discuss this)

Good example:

Bad example:

Issues for inline <math> environments

Use of \scriptstyle

To determine: Whether to use \scriptstyle to reduce the size of PNG-rendered inline math formulas. (discuss this)

Example with \scriptstyle: The identity is cool.

Example without \scriptstyle: The identity is cool.

Issues for the text

Capitalizing theorem names

Proposed policy: Do not capitalize names of theorems for that reason alone, either when referring to them in prose or when creating new CZ articles. Normally capitalized words within theorem names should still be capitalized. (discuss this)

Proposed good example: The fundamental theorem of covering spaces should never be called Martin's theorem, because Martin isn't a topologist.

Proposed bad example: The Fundamental Theorem of Covering Spaces should never be called Martin's Theorem, because Martin isn't a topologist.

Using phrases like "it is clear that", "obviously"