preview-latex: preview normal text?

preview-latex: preview normal text?

[Joerg Schuster]

Hello,

is it possible to preview normal text with preview-latex? I mean:
apart from defining a new environment "text".

Jörg 

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[David Kastrup]

Joerg Schuster <js@cis.uni-muenchen.de> writes:

> is it possible to preview normal text with preview-latex? I mean:
> apart from defining a new environment "text".

What are you trying to achieve?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[Joerg Schuster]

> What are you trying to achieve?

I just would like to preview all of my document. Normal text uses to
contain a lot of stuff that makes it hard to read. Like so:

     Let $w_1$ be a {\em \bf new word} whose {\sc meaning} is ``meaning''.

(I know that there is a problem with formulas that occur in normal
text.)

I also wonder why section headers are previewed while chapter headers
are not. Can I change this in some way?

Jörg

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[David Kastrup]

Joerg Schuster <js@cis.uni-muenchen.de> writes:

> > What are you trying to achieve?
> 
> I just would like to preview all of my document. Normal text uses to
> contain a lot of stuff that makes it hard to read. Like so:
> 
>      Let $w_1$ be a {\em \bf new word} whose {\sc meaning} is
>      ``meaning''.

You are aware that \em\bf is exactly equivalent to \bf, that both as
well as \sc are quite obsolete and have been for about 7 years?

> (I know that there is a problem with formulas that occur in normal
> text.)

preview-latex has no problems with formulas occuring in normal text.

What you want to achieve above is not something that preview-latex is
well-suited for.  While you could attach preview-latex to the \emph
and \textbf commands, the interaction with editing and line breaks
would be a nuisance, mostly.  It may be that at one time you can
teach preview-latex to not use images, but rather text properties to
do its work in some cases.  Then you could use it better in the way
you are thinking of.

If you want to work on that, you are welcome.

> I also wonder why section headers are previewed while chapter headers
> are not.

Probably because you are using some package that replaces chapter
headers by something not using \@startsection.

> Can I change this in some way?

Well, certainly.  But unless you tell us just what you are doing, it
will be hard to say how to do it differently.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[Joerg Schuster]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> You are aware that \em\bf is exactly equivalent to \bf, that both as
> well as \sc are quite obsolete and have been for about 7 years?

The example was quite artificial. Yet, I *do* use \bf, \em and \sc.
Why are they obsolete and what should one use instead? 
(\emph and \textbf?) I learned Latex from a 1996 book. They didn't say
anything about these commands' obsoleteness.

> preview-latex has no problems with formulas occuring in normal text.

Then it seems that I have misunderstood some passage of the manual
(that I cannot find now). 

> > I also wonder why section headers are previewed while chapter headers
> > are not.
> 
> Probably because you are using some package that replaces chapter
> headers by something not using \@startsection.
> 
> > Can I change this in some way?
> 
> Well, certainly.  But unless you tell us just what you are doing,

I am writing a document of the type [german]{book}. I would like
to preview all headers. I will attach my preamble to this mail.

Thanks for your answers so far and sorry for all this text.
I dont know how to state the problem clearly with less text.

Jörg

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

%&latex

\documentclass[german]{book}

\makeindex

%\usepackage[pdftex]{graphicx}                   % um pdf einzubinden
%\usepackage[usenames,dvipsnames]{color}         % keine Ahnung, warum man das braucht
%\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}                   % um Hyperlinks in der pdf-Datei zu erzeugen
\usepackage{a4wide}                              % Text breiter
\usepackage{tipa}                                % phonetische Zeichen
\usepackage{float}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
%\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{url}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage[noeepic]{qtree}
\usepackage{eurosym}
\usepackage{stmaryrd}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{lscape}
\usepackage{theorem}
\usepackage{array}
\usepackage{makeidx}
\usepackage{rotating}
\usepackage{multirow}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\alph{enumi})}
\renewcommand{\labelenumii}{\arabic{enumii}.}
\newcommand{\uuu}[1]{\underline{#1}}\theorembodyfont{\upshape}
\newcommand{\fig}{\input}
\newtheorem{Definition}{Definition}
\newtheorem{Anmerkung}{Anmerkung}
\newtheorem{Anmerkungen}[Anmerkung]{Anmerkungen}
\newtheorem{Axiom}{Axiom}
\newtheorem{Beispiel}{Beispiel}
\newtheorem{Beispiele}[Beispiel]{Beispiele}
\newtheorem{Aufgabe}{Aufgabe}
\newtheorem{Aufgaben}[Aufgabe]{Aufgaben}
\newtheorem{Personenbeschreibung}{Personenbeschreibung}
\newtheorem{Problem}{Problem}
\newtheorem{Notationskonvention}{Notationskonvention}
\newtheorem{Prinzip}{Prinzip}
\newtheorem{Lemma}{Lemma}
\usepackage[displaymath,textmath,sections,graphics,floats]{preview}
\PreviewEnvironment{enumerate}
\PreviewEnvironment{tabular}
\PreviewEnvironment{Text}
\PreviewEnvironment{Definition}
\PreviewEnvironment{Anmerkung}
\PreviewEnvironment{Anmerkungen}
\PreviewEnvironment{Beispiel}
\PreviewEnvironment{Beispiele}
\PreviewEnvironment{Personenbeschreibung}
\PreviewEnvironment{Aufgabe}
\begin{document}

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[David Kastrup]

Joerg Schuster <js@cis.uni-muenchen.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > You are aware that \em\bf is exactly equivalent to \bf, that both as
> > well as \sc are quite obsolete and have been for about 7 years?
> 
> The example was quite artificial. Yet, I *do* use \bf, \em and \sc.
> Why are they obsolete and what should one use instead?

Take a look at l2tabu.pdf on CTAN.

> (\emph and \textbf?) I learned Latex from a 1996 book. They didn't say
> anything about these commands' obsoleteness.

Take a look at a current calendar.  Write down the year we are having
now.  Subtract 7 from it.  Think hard.

> > > I also wonder why section headers are previewed while chapter headers
> > > are not.
> > 
> > Probably because you are using some package that replaces chapter
> > headers by something not using \@startsection.
> > 
> > > Can I change this in some way?
> > ?
> > Well, certainly.  But unless you tell us just what you are doing,
> 
> I am writing a document of the type [german]{book}. I would like
> to preview all headers. I will attach my preamble to this mail.
> 
> Thanks for your answers so far and sorry for all this text.
> I dont know how to state the problem clearly with less
> text.

[Elephant preamble with lots of uncommon and partly obsoleted styles
deleted.  You really need to read l2tabu.pdf and or use TeXidate
<URL:http://kohm.de.tf/markus/texidate.html>]

Think hard.  What would I have to do when presented with such an
example?  Narrow down the problem.  How?  By throwing out things that
might or might not be relevant, until only the stuff causing the
problem remains.  Why should I be doing this instead of you?

Anyhow, it appears that even the standard LaTeX does not use
\@startsection for chapters.  Too bad.  Try something like

\PreviewMacro[{*[]{}}]\chapter

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[Reiner Steib]

On Fri, Sep 05 2003, Joerg Schuster wrote:

> The example was quite artificial. Yet, I *do* use \bf, \em and \sc.
> Why are they obsolete and what should one use instead? 
> (\emph and \textbf?) I learned Latex from a 1996 book. They didn't say
> anything about these commands' obsoleteness.

>From your name and E-Mail, I suppose that you are German ==> Read the
document l2tabu.pdf that you can find on CTAN [1]:
<CTAN:info/german/l2tabu/>.

Concerning your document:

,----[ <URL:http://kohm.de.tf/markus/texidate.html> ]
| %% Below you'll find the result of running `TeXidate' on your document.
| %% <URL:http://kohm.de.tf/markus/texidate.html>
| TeXidate 0.5c
| Copyright (c) 2003 Markus Kohm
| 
| 8 (OBSOLETE): You should use one of geometry, typearea, vmargin instead of
| 	package a4wide.
`----

Followup-To: comp.text.tex (this has nothing to do with Emacs)

Bye, Reiner.

[1] CTAN = Comprehensive TeX Archive Network
    <URL:http://tug.ctan.org/tex-archive/info/german/l2tabu/>
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- PGP key available via WWW   http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[Joerg Schuster]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
 
> \PreviewMacro[{*[]{}}]\chapter

Thanks, that works.


> Take a look at l2tabu.pdf on CTAN.

Thanks for telling me.
 
> Take a look at a current calendar.  Write down the year we are having
> now.  Subtract 7 from it.  Think hard.

I did not expect you to be so precise, as you used the word "about".
Besides, the year 2003 is not over yet, to be precise. 

Actually, I just wanted to express with the remark in question my
being annoyed at the fact that so many parts of so many languages 
are becoming obsolete all the time. I didn't mean to criticize what
you said. It was a *rhetorical remark*, so to say. (You know
*rhetorical questions*, don't you?)

> Think hard.  What would I have to do when presented with such an
> example?  

O.k, o.k. I was fumbling around with preview-latex all day long (not
doing what I am supposed to do.) You asked me to give you more
information.

Jörg

Re: preview-latex: preview normal text?

[David Kastrup]

Joerg Schuster <js@cis.uni-muenchen.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>  
> > \PreviewMacro[{*[]{}}]\chapter
> 
> Thanks, that works.
> 
> 
> > Take a look at l2tabu.pdf on CTAN.
> 
> Thanks for telling me.
>  
> > Take a look at a current calendar.  Write down the year we are having
> > now.  Subtract 7 from it.  Think hard.
> 
> I did not expect you to be so precise, as you used the word "about".
> Besides, the year 2003 is not over yet, to be precise.

LaTeX2e was released in June 1994.  So it has been more than 9
years that NFSS has been a standard component of LaTeX.

> Actually, I just wanted to express with the remark in question my
> being annoyed at the fact that so many parts of so many languages 
> are becoming obsolete all the time. I didn't mean to criticize what
> you said. It was a *rhetorical remark*, so to say. (You know
> *rhetorical questions*, don't you?)

LaTeX2e was released in June 1994.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum