Issue 94198 - integrate Math in Writer
Summary: integrate Math in Writer
Alias: None
Product: Math
Classification: Application
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 2.4.1
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 Trivial with 2 votes (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: AOO issues mailing list
QA Contact:
Depends on:
Reported: 2008-09-23 03:25 UTC by tab
Modified: 2013-02-07 22:39 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

New Math description, with samples (69.80 KB, text/plain)
2008-09-23 03:27 UTC, tab
no flags Details
Results obtained with Insert formula --ericb's suggestion (15.40 KB, text/plain)
2008-09-23 14:21 UTC, tab
no flags Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description tab 2008-09-23 03:25:34 UTC
Get rid of the Math command window, enter math formulae in Writer with commands
such as `frac (a,b) and `int (a,b,x2dx); see the result in PagePreview.
Advantage: easier to use: no need to code font, bold, subscripts, etc; Search
will find strings and var names in formulae as well as 'regular' text.
see MathNew.odt
Comment 1 tab 2008-09-23 03:27:39 UTC
Created attachment 56741 [details]
New Math description, with samples
Comment 2 eric.bachard 2008-09-23 06:32:28 UTC
Your idea is great, but I wonder whether this is not possible doing what follows.

As I myself write a lot of equations, here is what I use to do: 

Tools -> Customize -> Keyboard : I have assigned CMD + M  ( CTRL + M for you ) key to insert an 

Then you simply have to 

1) write the equation in the text, say int csub0 csup T f(t) dt  

2) highlight the equation 

3)  do CTRL + M  ( or CMD + M on Mac )

4) hit esc  and the equation will appear in the text.

This is *really* fast,, you can believe me.

Comment 3 michael.ruess 2008-09-23 12:17:26 UTC
Reassigned to requirements.
Comment 4 tab 2008-09-23 13:52:56 UTC
ericb: Thank you for the suggestion. I never tried 'insert a formula' before,
and it does work nicely --either with 'int csub 0 csup T f(t) dt'
or 'int from 0 to T f(t) dt. And one does not even need step 4.
But my problem is not with speed; I have developped (with AutoHotKey) my own
keyboard shortcuts, even one to open the command window in one keystroke.
The problem is that Search does not 'go inside' formulae to find variables
names, eg, to change Xinput to X1.
Besides, you still need to enter code for fonts, subscripts, etc. For example, I
entered 'x0 over x1' in the Writer window, with x italicized and 0 and 1 as
upright subscripts; but, after the ^m trick, x0 and x1 came out (in the
fraction) without subscripts, and all-italics. Under the new proposal, all
formatting entered in the Writer window is preserved.
Comment 5 tab 2008-09-23 14:21:41 UTC
Created attachment 56769 [details]
Results obtained with Insert formula --ericb's suggestion
Comment 6 jbf.faure 2008-09-27 18:19:06 UTC
@tab : you have to use OOo-math syntax. x_1 over x_0 works well.
Your proposition is interesting but I don't see how you can easily combine
formula editing and automatic numbering. If you use autotext (NF in english, I
presume) you obtain a model you have only to modify.
Comment 7 tab 2008-10-01 02:24:10 UTC
 jbfaure:'you have to use OOo-math syntax. x_1 over x_0 works well'
	Yes, it does... within the command window. But, in the writer window, one needs
a consistent structure, such as 'cmnd(parameters)'. How would you write
`frac(a+b,c-f*p)? For one thing, you would need braces --which adds them to the
list of 'special' characters with restricted usage. Then, you could write
{a+b}`over{c-f*p}? Would this be simpler?
	And the parser, upon finding the command '`over', would have to backtrack to
find the numerator... With `frac, everything (including blanks) between the the
opening bracket and the separator (usually, comma) is the numerator, and
everything between the separator and the matching bracket is the denominator.
'everything' because it is already fully formatted under Writer and needs no
extra formatting, no ignoring or adding spaces, etc.
  I do not understand the problem with 'automatic numbering'. Numbering of what?
'If you use autotext (NF in english, I presume) you obtain a model you have only
to modify'
Sorry, this also escapes me.