Message-ID:  <9804201112.AA18688@tunix.mathematik.uni-stuttgart.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Date:         Mon, 20 Apr 1998 13:12:40 +0200
From: Volker Schubert <Volker.Schubert@MATHEMATIK.UNI-STUTTGART.DE>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Subject:      Arrays
Status: R

Thank you for your replies!


I didn't know that there are tabular-packages which are capable
of inserting minimal vertical space between the lines. Maybe one of
these packages (resp. certain concepts) should be built into LaTeX3 to
set a standard and to prevent incompatible packages. (But who decides
which one?)

(With ``arbitrary preambles for the horizontal alignment'' I meant,
that one should have a preamble-syntax just like with the array-environment.)


Now to the problem of \displaystyle in every column. David and Donald
suggested to use \displaystyle as the argument of an ``everymath''-command.
This is a solution but it might cause side-effects if one uses text
inside the array:

\begin{array}{ll}
& \Hom(M,\sum_i V_i)
=& \sum_i\Hom(M,V_i) ,\quad\mbox{since $M$ is $(\bigoplus_i V_i)$-projective}
\end{array}

Here an explanation appears inside a calculation. The calculation
should be printed in \displaystyle, but not the `little' math-symbols in the
explanation. I often use constructions of this form.
Wouldn't it be better to introduce something like ``\everycolumn{}''?


Volker