# Re: Displaystyle and mtable

From: Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 08:32:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CABqxo81j08W=+0m9hucR8iJrZzogE-Gd-76R25t6kShLmO6m=Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ross Moore <ross.moore@mq.edu.au>
Cc: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>
> But not all that strange, afterall.

Agreed. But I was referring to the corresponding MathML (and the
combination of all three cases).

Best,
Peter.

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Ross Moore <ross.moore@mq.edu.au> wrote:

> Hi David and Peter,
>
> On 19/09/2014, at 7:33, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 18/09/2014 22:09, Peter Krautzberger wrote:
> >> Thanks, David, for confirming the reading of the spec.
> >
>
>
> >> <mfrac>
> >> <mtable displaystyle="true">
> >> ...
> >> </mtable>
> >> <mrow>
> >> ...
> >> </mrow>
> >> </mfrac>
> >>
> >> would get us a table with displaystyle formatting, but in scriptstyle
> >> size (when used in an inline formula). (I admit I find that somewhat
> >> strange; oh well.)
> >
> > again, if tex did this you probably wouldn't find it strange:-)
>
> I can well imagine this being used in Statistics, or Statistical
> Mechanics, and related fields,
> where the fraction is the ratio of integrals or summations or products
> — especially for presentation slides, where the ratio of text width to
> line height is typically much less than in printed publications.
>
> Of course you need to manipulate the TeX by declaring \displaystyle within
> the numerator and denominator, as David suggests. But not all that strange,
> afterall.
>
>
> >>
> >> Thanks again for your quick response!
> >> Peter.
> >
> >
> > From the speed you may note that it was a personal response, but I think
> I only cited what the spec is saying:-)
> >
> > David
>
> Cheers,
>
>    Ross

Received on Friday, 19 September 2014 06:33:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:47 UTC