a_dent@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au (12/16/90)
I have a fried who is using Word for writing Math course books. He uses the equation features in Word because they are very convenient for changes (he's tried Mathtype) being still part of the Word document. Any suggestions for a better tool for writing the books/doing equations? I get the impression the thing that bugs him about MathType etc. is having to go out to the Apple menu etc. all the time, as well as the "picture" mode of transfer which makes it harder to position the equations in Word. Please post rather than mail your replies (keep international mail costs down!). TIA Andy Dent
nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Charles C. Allen) (12/17/90)
> I have a fried who is using Word for writing Math course books. > ... > Any suggestions for a better tool for writing the books/doing > equations? I get the impression the thing that bugs him > about MathType etc. is having to go out to the Apple menu etc. > all the time, as well as the "picture" mode of transfer which > makes it harder to position the equations in Word. FrameMaker has a built-in equation editor. It certainly beats Word's equations by a large margin. PROS built-in reasonable editing auto-numbering of equations (and figures, etc.) runs on Unix workstations as well, and files can be shared CONS expensive (although they do have an educational discount) equations are not as well-formed as Expressionist or MathType tries to do algebra as well, which sometimes gets in the way It's the first real alternative to TeX I've found for technical publications on the Mac. Charles Allen Internet: cca@physics.purdue.edu Department of Physics nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu Purdue University HEPnet: purdnu::allen, fnal::cca West Lafayette, IN 47907 talknet: 317/494-9776
scavo@CIE.UOREGON.EDU (12/17/90)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps Subject: Re: Equations - better way than Word? Summary: try FrameMaker, MathWriter, or TeX References: <1990Dec16.205059.2706@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au> Reply-To: scavo@cie.uoregon.edu (Tom Scavo) Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange Keywords: equations, mathematical typesetting In article <1990Dec16.205059.2706@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au> a_dent@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au writes: >I have a fried who is using Word for writing Math course books. > >He uses the equation features in Word because they are very >convenient for changes (he's tried Mathtype) being still part >of the Word document. > >Any suggestions for a better tool for writing the books/doing >equations? I get the impression the thing that bugs him >about MathType etc. is having to go out to the Apple menu etc. >all the time, as well as the "picture" mode of transfer which >makes it harder to position the equations in Word. Yes, Word formula commands ARE handy. The problem is that the program knows all too little about the art of mathematical typesetting. For example, the positions of superscripts and subscripts must be specified by the user, and Word's formatting of integrals is preposterous. But I also like the idea of an integrated package of writing tools that includes a mathematical equation editor, and have looked far and wide for such a beast. There are only two alternatives to Word that I know of, and one of those hasn't been released yet. FrameMaker has a very good equations editor, excellent book-making features, and even a built-in drawing palette. But the quality of Frames's equations pales in comparison with that TeX---the definitive mathematical typesetting tool (but then what doesn't :-). On the other hand, FM's unique interface makes the creation of mathematics a breeze (if you have the appropriate hardware, that is). The only other wysiwyg technical word processor is version 2 of MathWriter, to be released Real Soon Now. It doesn't have all of the features of FM (but then it doesn't cost near as much either) but sure is better than Word for creating short technical documents. I wouldn't recommend MW to book writers, however. FrameMaker completely ignores the TeX standard as far as I'm aware. The makers of MathWriter, however, will offer various file filters designed to work seamlessly with their program. I've looked at an RTF filter, and I understand a TeX filter will also be available. Tom Scavo scavo@cie.uoregon.edu
fs285119@seas.gwu.edu (Scott Cherkofsky) (12/17/90)
I use a nice little DA called Expressionist to write equations in. It is very good, has lots of options for the type of characters you will be writing, For Example, the are sub/superscripts, both at the same time, or one at a time There are multiple special characters (symbol font) along with options like special parenthasies, uderscoring, over scoring (like H bars) as well as fractions, square roots, you name it, this thing has got it. It also allows you the option to print to an imagewriter OR a laserprinter (the type comes out better if you use the appropriate option - printing in postscript for the laserprinter). The main way the DA works is to allow you to make the equation by adding the special blocks you want (fraction, square root etc.) and then when you have finished you can either copy them as text to the application you want them in or you can copy them as a PICT to the application - I like to copy them as a PICT file, that way I can scale them without messing up the formatting. I give this program the thumbs up definitively. four stars, four mice and all the fireworks! If you would like to purchase this pearl, here is the address (may not still be valid as I received this back in '89. Allan Bonadio Associates 814 Castro St. #60 San Francisco, CA 94114 (415) 282-5864 I hope this helps you out. Scott -- Scott Cherkofsky "One thing I have learned in long life: That George Washington U. all our science, measured against reality, fs285119@seas.gwu.edu is primitive and childlike - and yet it is ME Student the most precious thing we have." - A. Einstein
jlhaferman@l_eld09.icaen.uiowa.edu (Jeff Haferman) (12/17/90)
From article <9012161929.AA14458@cie.uoregon.edu>, by scavo@CIE.UOREGON.EDU: > > In article <1990Dec16.205059.2706@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au> a_dent@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au writes: >> >>Any suggestions for a better tool for writing the books/doing >>equations? I get the impression the thing that bugs him >>about MathType etc. is having to go out to the Apple menu etc. >>all the time, as well as the "picture" mode of transfer which >>makes it harder to position the equations in Word. > > Yes, Word formula commands ARE handy. The problem is that > the program knows all too little about the art of mathematical > typesetting. For example, the positions of superscripts and > subscripts must be specified by the user, and Word's formatting > of integrals is preposterous. But I also like the idea of an > integrated package of writing tools that includes a mathematical > equation editor, and have looked far and wide for such a beast. > For integrals, try .\i(a,b,.\a( , )) <integrand expression> i.e. this gives WORD a null array as the integrand and makes the integral sign look "right". The same technique works well for summation. Jeff Haferman internet: jlhaferman@icaen.uiowa.edu Department of Mechanical Engineering DoD 0186 BMWMOA 44469 AMA 460140 University of Iowa Iowa City IA 52242
hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu (HP48SX Archive Maintainer) (12/17/90)
I also uses Expressionist. This is a very good package, and you can even cut formulaes you have already inserted in your document, back to the formula editor. Another thing that might bother people is that WORD :-( fails to use the baseline offset information supplied by most typesetting programs for the Macintosh. Disclaimer: I have used LaTeX, but have now settled down with NISUS, which is the state of the art wordprocessor for the Macintosh (free demo available from jon@weber.ucsd.edu), and Expressionist which I think is the best price/performance ratio in mathematical typesetting (apart from OzTeX). Disclaimer disclaimer: I am not connected with Paragon Concepts or the company making Expressionist in any way. I just happened to have bought their products. -- ******************************************************* Povl H. Pedersen hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu HP48sx archive maintainer
scavo@cie.uoregon.edu (Tom Scavo) (12/19/90)
In article <3623@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jlhaferman@l_eld09.icaen.uiowa.edu (Jeff Haferman) writes: > >For integrals, try > > .\i(a,b,.\a( , )) <integrand expression> > >i.e. this gives WORD a null array as the integrand and makes the integral >sign look "right". The same technique works well for summation. This doesn't clear up the problem I had in mind. First of all, the integral should almost always be of Word's "inline" type--- you'll rarely see the limits directly above and below the integral symbol in mathematical writing---and this is precisely the problem since .\I.\in(<llimit>,<ulimit>,<integrand>) looks absolutely awful. By trial and error, I've found that .\I.\in(.\S.\do4(<llimit>),.\S.\ai-4(<ulimit),<integrand>) gives much better results. You'll probably want to put this in a glossary, however. Secondly, it's not a good idea to separate the integrand from the integral formula command since you lose the benefit of an auto-sizing integral symbol. Tom Scavo scavo@cie.uoregon.edu
fchang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Floating Point) (12/19/90)
To have mathematical symbols and equations in WORD for the Macintosh, I prefer to use the program called MathType, by Design Science, Inc. It not only does integrals, it does many many many more things in very user-friendly ways. You pick out what you want to do from templates, or using keyboard short-cuts. I often use it in under Multi-Finder where I write my equations, select it, copy it, and then paste it into my WORD document. For those who dislike Multi-Finder, there is a DA version as well. The copy I have is version 2.02, dated 1989. This version has some queer bugs that aren't fatal, but inconvenient. - fpc - fchang@sdcc13.ucsd.edu -- _____ _ _ __
white@ucs.sfu.ca (Steve White) (01/03/91)
I don't recommend using the automatic scaling feature of Word's .\i
command. Instead, I put a space in the third argument, formatted so
that it gives the integral of the right size. I've included a stuffed
and binhex'ed example of some particularly messy formulas below. The
file includes norm signs and summations. I'm using Adobe fonts here--
it won't look right if you use anything else.
With regard to MathType, etc.: They do make very pretty expressions,
but there is a very serious difficulty with them that I've never seen
discussed. They produce PICT's, at a minimum of about 3k each. I've
seen a 20 page Word document take up like 350k! This is, of course,
in very math-intensive documents.
(This file must be converted with BinHex 4.0)
:&eG[FQ3JCA&eELiJCAKKEA"XCA-ZFfPd!&0*9#&6593K!!!!!!E+!!!!!&468dP
8)3!"!!!'bR*-BA8"!!!!!!!!!!!#&@9iB@e`E'9c)'pQ)'PZG'9RFQ&XF`!C#6S
!!!!$!"N2VJ!#HVS!'*q1!!5SA!!C#6S$1J%3!"`!!3!!!"LIU&G%3Nj08eG%!3#
MPpdLSjIG*3!!!!!!!!`!!!!!!!!!"N3!!1FN!!!!!!!!qqrqEJ$J!+#J3B-C$Ki
-B&!!NB),2#J%%1$Ka)XB$bSSU+(J4J!G!5J)kC'Nb)i12+,3Z0+JJTBU@3+!i"'
(5)p#01B-UB!,!$`aA9)$!-)M2Be(98#8k*+N!)SCSdUG5T@UJ64AhD!`--F!Q6F
f8-")`B+VJ6"T@Z"!FBHXfDmb8)")N8)*#M`R8S"!m[E0eMNS8-3J#f*X#K4V3"M
!Bi"0'30bdQ`PBd"-Q"SSp"l'd`+[!4E+mU4Bh2Kaj-Q9,fHHQi)-AK!05$Z',0P
VDXbDJlM"!k)&L##-'FmqEGXblVNJ324)EX"[Qc"i@-`"i3c%&KLI3F6SSVGbj6%
'q'c&DJCmZEpRdm40Se`l@6FXjZl"Jf+1Qc3TYT`"61HqAYrlSG!I#QN0PN)AbIP
Q&PTKcA999ZKp&9Crq*A9&9TU#DK9JA4Ck08EFFe&(aedN4%JLAfNd!!%AMJ!KLC
H22#L&a$-'-'-%VaSJ4M#p%""',MNF%%P,9S#aT!!TrK5"`a$aQM*"%G@NQ3GjJ5
3!!X(jUK3!!3A9+#1&b5Bmd#AN!"8d1)%5S,a"813!&!!b36G@($'-)`Xd`d&hL$
$4J))('"!!33-)%!!GhSK`ak3!%M3$3!*@,#'-!H)8B%KDe4`5*aM#*2!&a5)3d%
i9P3!535,*S$*&bB!3-Be-Rc"53#VaQ!%(M088%`2&T!!8FdP&-aJJ65dJ['-!KC
8J!X"ZHkDacZ4,0S"*Q$%B!%J+,6"aaIq"'!'1D[FNBBUDP4$M5TVQ'1!0La3-))
&&$c`663(X2[),c[N33mBH+3JJaPiM2$!#&$L03)%8F6"4`9JN!!"KMN%M)-2!49
%FF@l,b"m$`(X$,"-(4G-N!#*a4J2B!%Z"Pc-MJ!EAr"!*LD,M)X!0#M!`m9N[20
`(XXJh2((4kl-`"MI1$0"ZlJmB!!["EKJ`!U`*+!!-!QiS-!+XX"LM!-28,"(d!4
N[FF+%6LJ4`X8S"#"$"9!m#i$&L``E`8Yh%,$!M`XHhEDlfj4m-%*,pc``bhcBV)
!b#b!m$I2'"$aa-m)!%Bh,HY5J54l)k````iM@a"$QcH`H8S82E!j644KX(P#&*@
`HDS8RE"j#TXV4G%+Ql1`H3fEfd44$T[[X,N2Qrq`14#E4l'j&*Y6XAN9QeZa14D
EEl'j6a5jXINEQmHa14fE(l)j)TXRXVNLQbqb151E0l+j)jXrXRNNQiZbq5LENl)
j+TZcXRNVQlZbq5ZEJmAQBV%j@@aZ&T[EaHD@X6PQE'iS&+R'jUbaZ@YX,KZEfmE
QZ,'j49(N'jX$aqE#X6PaE'iFQb[(jXka1A4X,Kd!i!F!mJ%!H`"J(J#3!!F!hX'
1'2T`(ZqBB3l6S8-GdY#)!#K(1(3)3b3Z+K[9`'!dQT'-CJ#J'!!3"Mpq)80Kd(!
A455K2-*KJ*X!!!Bb,!!!6(F""a3!#!JSL!2+f*%,S"%!G!4!'ip5aSmiJ)p!m10
4$J#!!4L%!!JSie-+3J!m!N!#HJ6!8``35$R+m!"!i&a"d0&)QP`!!*d%3%V8'%F
!)#!!3#!!%'Jb5L#BcJ&Z0'9"*%"+13*!#5rFR$SfYil0Y@0c3D3)2$BAMmhTN!!
L1+6)85K5MmhCN!!LppJF2MC(3iVXBh2r+-JL*IP*5CT1NL%4`!Dd54"*NN#EUT-
Nk`6J1NQf4!#`Nb6Y*'N$E3T%NVS6!1mNk6Y*pN#E`*1Nm#4*2%N'3CXjNH4$r+%
2!%56S3"Jk$cdm3iF4T-G,P3K4X1"MQk3!0!I%BeS3d'+`DUBp+3S6DP+9mV5PVV
dT5IYBd(ZQ-F,-%#'-JA!63&3bdG5mL-lI@-T*9"6"q$8M%B&j8`Lq90,8S4imG4
N!1bJ65,XijS`cDT@YmV9VRVeUf!0UeM(5YDbQ[8LMEc)0Jd*J!1%NJ)L)D4#'-)
3EdbN)U$mKekc#C9F+P55KGaF3ak5eX!fdR-TS3NNi9S"!&JJNL%!J!J#@a!N!-#
b$G''!&$`Mh$m3a`#b)F!M$#!)a3!"313!1%f,BYCE@Tf*CSNJd(S'J#TRN"dG+A
+8c)3!%JST+![l3%iAJ#0!S$L!!J`,R+e#3hN35@h'&R*S*B3!*!!*N15!E$#8i#
4N3!-J9'!!%"i0rIGXjVh[1K0VdS"JAN!!!: