Hi,
Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> Fabrice Popineau <fabrice.popin...@supelec.fr> writes:
>
>> Given that it is only a matter of presentation, does that mean it could 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
\(aⁿᵇⁿ\)
it would be displayed as
(*) \(aⁿbⁿ\)
Of course, it /only/ makes sense to change how it is displayed in
math-mode, for which (*) is the more accurate depiction of (+).
If what was indeed what Fabrice had in mind I think it makes sense.
But I also have been bothered by how (+) is displayed in the past. . .
—Rasmus
--
I hear there's rumors on the, uh, Internets. . .
