Re: [O] math in parentheses

[Andreas Leha]

Hi Nick,

Nick Dokos <address@hidden> writes:
> Andreas Leha <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Richard Lawrence <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>
>>> Andreas Leha <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>> I encounter a problem using $..$ expressions when they are enclosed
>>>> in parentheses.
>>>
>>>> This $T$ works, but ($T$) this does not.
>>>>
>>>> Is that expected behaviour?
>>>>
>>>> (Note that \(...\) expressions work.)
>>>
>>> Yes, that is the expected behavior.  Org is much pickier about when "$"
>>> can be a math delimiter than "\( ... \)".  The reason is that "$" can
>>> also be used as a regular symbol in Org documents; when it is, it should
>>> be *not* be exported as a math delimiter to LaTeX, and distinguishing
>>> non-math-delimiting from math-delimiting uses of "$" is not a trivial
>>> matter.
>>>
>>> Thus, when in doubt, use "\( ... \)".
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for following that up.  I do use \(...\) when I encounter
>> problems with $...$ (which is a lot nicer to type and read).
>>
>> I am happy with using the fall-back \(...\) every now and then.
>>
>> Just for me to understand:  Is the problem the missing whitespace
>> around the $...$ expression?
>>
>
> See
>
>    
> http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/510/are-and-preferable-to-dollar-signs-for-math-mode
>
> for some arguments for and (mostly) against (although one of the "for"s
> is Frank Mittelbach - which surely tilts the scale quite a lot).

Thanks.  A very good read.  These are arguments on the LaTeX end.  My
question was more on the orgmode end, I guess.

> FWIW,
> I've trained myself to use \(...\) and don't find it any harder to read
> than $...$ - and I don't mind the extra typing either.  The fact that
> both org and MathJax deal better with \(...\) just reinforces that
> choice.

I do not agree with the readability but I can live (quite happily) with
using \(...\).  And maybe my perception of the readability changes over
time....

Regards,
Andreas