Talk:AMS-LaTeX

Untitled

Is AMS-LaTeX good for something else than generating its own logo? --Abdull 08:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I've listed 3 types of features of ${\mathcal {A}}\!_{\displaystyle {\mathcal {M}}}\!{\mathcal {S}}\!\!\;{\textrm {-}}\mathrm {L\!\!^{{}_{\scriptstyle A}}\!\!\!\!\!\;\;T\!_{\displaystyle E}\!X}$. –Pomte 21:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't deny its usefulness, but it seems to me that the amsmath package neither defines a {theorem} nor a {proof} environment. — MFH:Talk 22:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Quite right. The {proof} environment is provided by the amsthm package, and a {theorem} environment has to be defined by the user with the \newtheorem command (which is revised by the amsthm package). The packages amsthm and amssymb are not automatically included by amsmath, but I think they are considered part of AMS-LaTeX so they should be in the article. McKay (talk) 04:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Are we mixing AmS-LaTeX and HTML in the same document?

The theorem example includes the command "<br>" to create a line break. I doubt this will work in any TeX dialect. The proper TeX command is "\\". There may be more friendly commands in AMS-LaTeX. The code sample should be corrected. (Actually, common practice does not normally use line breaks when typesetting theorem enunciations, unless they are extremely long.) -- Solo Owl 18:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. As you say, we wouldn't normally use a linebreak at that place at all, but the point here is to make it look like the "output" which has a hard-coded linebreak. Actually I think these examples would be better if the outputs were shown as images of actual typeset text instead of poor approximations of it made with html. McKay (talk) 03:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree. In fact, it is dishonest to imitate it with another app. If I have some time this weekend, I will try to do it.

— Solo Owl 14:22, 15 January 2014 (UTC)