Re: [Scheme-reports] Minor things in draft six of small-language report seven

[Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@x>]

John Cowan writes:
> Jussi Piitulainen scripsit:

> > (p. 34 right)
> > the umpteen division procedures are labelled as "procedure" indicating
> > at a quick glance that they would be in (scheme base) but they aren't,
> 
> Telling the truth would be too verbose.
> 
> > they are in the division library. (The text tells the truth on second
> > glance.) (The label would fit better if it was just "division
> > procedure" instead of "division library procedure".)
> 
> In our view, that wouldn't read well in the general case.

How about doing it just in this one place? This place is already
different.

> > (p. 36 top right)
> > In an occurrence of e^{ix_4} the exponent is in text size why? It
> > looks funny.
>
> Editorial ticket #417 filed; I'm not TeXnical enough to fix this myself.

The default e^{ix_4} should be fine. There must be a \textstyle in the
exponent or something similar in the source.


_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports