On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 9:35 AM, John H Palmieri <jhpalmier...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Do we have any conventions or standards for the use of LaTeX in
> docstrings? Consider this:
>
> r"""
> This computes the integral homology `H_d(X, ZZ)` of `X` in
> dimension `d`.
> """
>
> versus
>
> r"""
> This computes the integral homology `H_d(X, \mathbb{Z})` of `X` in
> dimension `d`.
> """
>
> (or with \mathbf{Z} instead of \mathbb{Z}). The first of these looks
> better with interactive help ('sage: homology?'), and the second looks
> better in the reference manual. So which should we use? Should we
> have a style guide which settles such issues?
My vote would be for `H_d(X, \ZZ)` (for easier typing), combined with
some sort of LaTeX-to-plain-text processing to change \ZZ to Z or ZZ
(I'm not sure which). (We have some LaTeX-to-plain-text already,
although it could definitely be improved.)
This also requires that we fix things so that jsmath knows about the
macros we use, where we use jsmath. (According to the jsmath
documentation, this shouldn't be hard; there are several ways to do
it.)
And yes, we should definitely have a style guide.
Carl
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
