Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!ames!xanth!mcnc!rti!sas!bts
From: bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: Slanted + signs in italic text?
Message-ID: <1055@sas.UUCP>
Date: 26 May 89 16:51:14 GMT
References: <47700053@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <566@sphere.mast.ohio-state.edu>
Reply-To: bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger)
Organization: SAS Institute Inc, Cary NC
Lines: 28

In article <566@sphere.mast.ohio-state.edu> gae@sphere.UUCP (Gerald Edgar) writes:
|In article <47700053@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
|>
|>to slanted ones ($\theta$ {\it +} $\theta$) and to my eyes it looks
|>more normal. What do the cognoscenti out there think of this?
|
|REAL math books do not use slanted + signs.  Of course, with TeX,
|you can do whatever you want.  But I think you should do things as
|much like everyone else as possible, or the reader will be distracted.

Well, certainly you shouldn't slant the + just because the math fonts are
slanted (that would be really odd), but are you certain about the conventions
when the entire math formula is logically part of slanted text?  I'm not sure
that I've ever seen such a thing myself, so I wouldn't know either way.  Not
meaning to question you, I'm just wondering if you've actually seen the
situation described.

In any case, why is the original poster slanting so much text that it
includes a formula?  Generally, slanted text should be kept to a bar
minimum, methinks.  More than one word tends to look busy fairly quickly,
except in unusual situations.

Just my 2\cents worth . . .
-- 
-- Brian, the Man from Babble-on.		...!mcnc!rti!sas!bts
--
"Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part
that isn't thinking isn't thinking of" -- THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS