On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:57:55AM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Martin Vermeer schrieb:
>
> > I think the inset should be based on a frameless textinset,
> > but collapsable would be overkill.
>
> +1
>
> > The "text sub/superscript" is meant for things like 2nd, 3rd,
> > or in French 2ieme, Nro, Mme, Mlle, ... where math is obviously
> > inappropriate. Uwe what I get about your olleagues, are they
> > using this for chemistry (CO2, H2O, ...)?
>
> Yes, and I use this too. I also need sub/ and superscripts for various
> indices for variables, names, and conventions.
>
> > If so, that deserves
> > its own implementation, and there, math would be a more
> > logical starting point than text.
>
> Why? "H2O" is correctly H\textsubscript{2}O
>
> Math is incorrect here. Note that we currently use \text in math to undo the
> italics of math and this is an ugly hack.
What you should use there is \mathrm which has the correct size behaviour.
> \textsuper/subscript is exactly
> designed for cases of "H2O", "SO_4^2-", "2nd", and the like.
No Uwe, you are IMHO mixing up two conceptually different classes of
sub/superscript. The chemistry stuff is not math, but similar to math, let's
say "formula-like", a visual mini-language. It would deserve its own machinery,
that gets the roman right, knows the periodic table and allows for isotope
weights top left. It should probably support some chemistry package for LaTeX
(which I am not familiar with).
That would be the proper way to do it. A separate running-text
sub/super facility is needed, but using it for chemistry is un-LaTeX-like and
as much a hack as using math for it.
> regards Uwe
Regards Martin
