Week

I am trying to customize section names add them correctly to the ToC While I found a working solution for a standard tex document using the \titleformat from the titlesec package, I have to issues with when doing the same for an ebook: The customized title is not used in the headline of the relevant sections While I can manually add a new line to the ToC even with my customized title, the \protect\setcounter{tocdepth}{0} command does not surpress the standard section line to appear in the ToC, i.e. I now have the sections twice in the ToC Is there a way to solve this so that it looks similar to what is shown when compiling a pdf instead of an ebook? Here is an MWE that works for pdf but has the above issues for an ebook: \documentclass{book} \usepackage{tex4ebook} \usepackage{cleveref} \usepackage{titlesec} \titleformat{\section}{\normalfont\Large\bfseries}{My Section~\thesection}{1em}{} \renewcommand{\thesection}{\arabic{section}} \begin{document} \tableofcontents \addtocontents{toc}{\protect\setcounter{tocdepth}{0}} \section{Headline} \label{sec:Headline} \addtocontents{toc}{\protect\setcounter{tocdepth}{2}} \addcontentsline{toc}{section}{My Section \thesection \hspace{1em} Headline} Some text. \addtocontents{toc}{\protect\setcounter{tocdepth}{0}} \section{Another headline} \addtocontents{toc}{\protect\setcounter{tocdepth}{2}} \addcontentsline{toc}{section}{My Section \thesection \hspace{1em} Another headline} Some text. \end{document} and the relevant cfg file \Preamble{xhtml} \Css{nav ol li{ list-style-type: none; }} \begin{document} \EndPreamble

is it possible to make a stroke that transitions from thick to thin, like a Chinese brush or a calligraphy pen? Not like a bent hook that fakes the transition using elliptical pens, that one is cheating. I want a perfectly straight line, that starts out thick and transitions to thin. Is it possible to do such a "dynamic brush" effect"?

The TikZ tangent coordinate system appears to be inaccurate. The blue and red lines are expected to overlap, but they fail to do so. \documentclass{standalone} \usepackage{tikz} \usetikzlibrary{calc} \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture} \draw [help lines,dotted,thick] (0,0) grid (10,10); \def\rA{.5} \def\rB{4} \coordinate (OA) at (1,1); \coordinate (OB) at (5,5); \path (OA) node (A) [draw,circle,minimum size=2*\rA cm] {A}; \path (OB) node (B) [draw,circle,minimum size=2*\rB cm] {B}; \path ($(A.center)!{\rA/(\rA - \rB)}!(B.center)$) coordinate (X) node [below left] {X}; \path (tangent cs:node=A,point={(X)},solution=1) coordinate (A1); \path (tangent cs:node=A,point={(X)},solution=2) coordinate (A2); \path (tangent cs:node=B,point={(X)},solution=1) coordinate (B1); \path (tangent cs:node=B,point={(X)},solution=2) coordinate (B2); \draw [blue] (X) -- (A1) -- ([turn]0:9cm); \draw [red] (X) -- (B1) -- ([turn]0:5cm); \draw [blue] (X) -- (A2) -- ([turn]0:9cm); \draw [red] (X) -- (B2) -- ([turn]0:5cm); \end{tikzpicture} \end{document} Corrected by adding outer sep=0pt: \documentclass{standalone} \usepackage{tikz} \usetikzlibrary{calc} \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture} \draw [help lines,dotted,thick] (0,0) grid (10,10); \def\rA{.5} \def\rB{4} \coordinate (OA) at (1,1); \coordinate (OB) at (5,5); \path (OA) node (A) [draw,circle,minimum size=2*\rA cm,outer sep=0pt] {A}; %% \path (OB) node (B) [draw,circle,minimum size=2*\rB cm,outer sep=0pt] {B}; %% \path ($(A.center)!{\rA/(\rA - \rB)}!(B.center)$) coordinate (X) node [below left] {X}; \path (tangent cs:node=A,point={(X)},solution=1) coordinate (A1); \path (tangent cs:node=A,point={(X)},solution=2) coordinate (A2); \path (tangent cs:node=B,point={(X)},solution=1) coordinate (B1); \path (tangent cs:node=B,point={(X)},solution=2) coordinate (B2); \draw [blue] (X) -- (A1) -- ([turn]0:9cm); \draw [red] (X) -- (B1) -- ([turn]0:5cm); \draw [blue] (X) -- (A2) -- ([turn]0:9cm); \draw [red] (X) -- (B2) -- ([turn]0:5cm); \end{tikzpicture} \end{document}

Is there an automatic way to avoid "TikZ code after" overlap the text? I give a real use case, and not a MWE. \documentclass[12pt]{scrartcl} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage[top=1cm, bottom=1.95cm, left=.9cm, right=.9cm]{geometry} \usepackage{nicematrix} \usepackage[svgnames]{xcolor} \usepackage{tikz] \tikzset{ product/.style = { shorten > = 3.75mm, thick }, product-times/.style = { pos=0.5, circle, fill=white, inner sep=2pt }, arrow/.style = { ->, thick }, rounded-frame/.style = { draw, rounded corners, thick, inner sep = 5pt, anchor = west } } \begin{document} XXX $\begin{NiceArray}{*{9}{c}}[cell-space-limits=3pt] & & & & & & & & C_j^{\,\prime} \\ & & & & & & & & \phantom{X} \\ & & & & & & & & \Vdots[shorten-start=11pt] \\ & & & & & & & & \color{IndianRed}a[k]_{qj} \\ & & & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & & & \color{ForestGreen} a[k]_{rj} \\ & & & & & & & & \Vdots[shorten-end=21pt] \\ & & \NotEmpty & & & & \NotEmpty & & \\ L_i & \hspace{3pt} & \Cdots[shorten-start=18pt] & \color{IndianRed} 1 & \Cdots & \color{ForestGreen} 0 & \Cdots[shorten-end=18pt] & \hspace{12.5pt} & a[k{+}1]_{ij} % \CodeAfter % Sous-matrices. \SubMatrix({3-9}{7-9})[slim] \SubMatrix({9-3}{9-7}) \SubMatrix({9-9}{9-9}) % Décorons... \begin{tikzpicture} % Indication pour la ligne et la colonne. \draw[ arrow, shorten > = 8mm, ] (1-9.south) to (4-9.north); \draw[ arrow, shorten < = 1mm, shorten > = 9.5mm, ] (9-1.east) to (9-4.west); % Flèches des produits. \draw[ product, IndianRed, ] (9-4.north) to [bend left] node[ product-times, draw = IndianRed, ] {$\times$} (4-9.west); \draw[ product, ForestGreen, ] (9-6.north) to [bend left] node[ product-times, draw = ForestGreen ] {$\times$} (6-9.west) ; % Signification des entrées. \draw[ arrow, ForestGreen, ] ([yshift=-5mm]9-6.south) to (9-6.south); \node[ rounded-frame, ForestGreen ] at ([yshift=-8.1mm, xshift=-2mm]9-6.south) {Pas de lien direct de $i$ à $r$.}; % \draw[ arrow, IndianRed, ] ([yshift=-13.5mm]9-4.south) to (9-4.south); \node[ rounded-frame, IndianRed ] at ([yshift=-17mm, xshift=-2mm]9-4.south) {Un lien direct de $i$ à $q$.}; % \draw[ arrow, IndianRed ] ([xshift=8.5mm] 4-9.east) to ([xshift=3.5mm] 4-9.east); \node[ rounded-frame, IndianRed, ] at ([xshift=8.5mm] 4-9.east) {Nombre de parcours de longueur $k$ de $q$ à $j$.}; % \draw[ arrow, ForestGreen, ] ([xshift=8.5mm] 6-9.east) to ([xshift=3.5mm] 6-9.east); \node[ rounded-frame, ForestGreen, ] at ([xshift=8.5mm] 6-9.east) {Nombre de parcours de longueur $k$ de $r$ à $j$.}; \end{tikzpicture} \end{NiceArray}$ XXX \end{document}

I noticed that when I start from a custom environment, and then decide to do something slightly non-trivial with its content (like hide it, or typeset in a different color), I end up switching to a custom macro with an argument. Consider, for example, these questions: Hide custom environment content based on boolean Environment hiding its content I have no idea how to make the content of an environment disappear without using packages like comment or version or scontents. On the other hand, this is trivial to do with a custom macro: just (re)define the macro as a no-op: \newcommand\comment[1]{}. It looks to me that any environment could be replaced with a macro, to have \theorem{...} instead of \begin{theorem}...\end{theorem}, etc. On the other hand, I do not know how to make an environment that, for example, duplicates or discards its content, or puts it in a box. What are the advantages of environments over macros that offset the inconveniences? P.S. IMO the environ package takes the correct approach.

I have defined a counter (firstcounter) and, in the first column, item numbers display as I'd expect. However, in the middle column with the same code (but a secondcounter to avoid interaction with the first list), I have changed \only<1-> to \only<1-4> and it breaks the numbering. The right hand column (with two separate counters, thirdcounter and fourthcounter), 'works' but unsatisfactorily; I feel I should not need an extra counter for each resumption of enumeration. Can someone explain to me what I'm doing wrong? \documentclass{beamer} \newcounter{firstcounter} \newcommand{\setfirst}{\setcounter{firstcounter}{\value{enumi}}} \newcommand{\contfirst}{\setcounter{enumi}{\value{firstcounter}}} \newcounter{secondcounter} \newcommand{\setsecond}{\setcounter{secondcounter}{\value{enumi}}} \newcommand{\contsecond}{\setcounter{enumi}{\value{secondcounter}}} \newcounter{thirdcounter} \newcommand{\setthird}{\setcounter{thirdcounter}{\value{enumi}}} \newcommand{\contthird}{\setcounter{enumi}{\value{thirdcounter}}} \newcounter{fourthcounter} \newcommand{\setfourth}{\setcounter{fourthcounter}{\value{enumi}}} \newcommand{\contfourth}{\setcounter{enumi}{\value{fourthcounter}}} \begin{document} \begin{frame} %left column \begin{minipage}{0.3\textwidth} \only<1->{ \begin{enumerate} \item 1st \item <2-> 2nd \item <3-> 3rd. \item <4-> 4th \setfirst \end{enumerate} } \only<5->{ \begin{enumerate} \contfirst \item 5th. \item <6-> 6th. \item <7-> 7th. \setfirst \end{enumerate} } \only<8->{ \begin{enumerate} \contfirst \item 8th. \item <9-> 9th. \item <10-> 10th. \end{enumerate} } \end{minipage} % middle column \begin{minipage}{0.3\textwidth} \only<1-4>{ \begin{enumerate} \item 1st \item <2-> 2nd \item <3-> 3rd. \item <4-> 4th \setsecond \end{enumerate} } \only<5->{ \begin{enumerate} \contsecond \item 5th. \item <6-> 6th. \item <7-> 7th. \setsecond \end{enumerate} } \only<8->{ \begin{enumerate} \contsecond \item 8th. \item <9-> 9th. \item <10-> 10th. \end{enumerate} } \end{minipage} % right column \begin{minipage}{0.3\textwidth} \only<1-4>{ \begin{enumerate} \item 1st \item <2-> 2nd \item <3-> 3rd. \item <4-> 4th \setthird \end{enumerate} } \only<5->{ \begin{enumerate} \contthird \item 5th. \item <6-> 6th. \item <7-> 7th. \setfourth \end{enumerate} } \only<8->{ \begin{enumerate} \contfourth \item 8th. \item <9-> 9th. \item <10-> 10th. \end{enumerate} } \end{minipage} \end{frame} \end{document} These are all the same lists and should have the same numbering.

The following M(not)WE fails because of the \Cdots used. Is there a quick fix of this bug? The log file indicates the error below if I uncomment the failing sub matrix command. Package nicematrix Error: Impossible delimiter. (nicematrix) It's impossible to draw the right delimiter of (nicematrix) your \SubMatrix because all the cells are empty (nicematrix) in that column. (nicematrix) This \SubMatrix will be ignored. Here is the LaTeX code. \documentclass[border=5pt, varwidth]{standalone} \usepackage{nicematrix} \begin{document} $\begin{NiceArray}{*{7}{c}}[cell-space-limits=3pt] & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & a[k]_{mj} \\ & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & a[k]_{m'j} \\ & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & \phantom{X} \\ \Cdots & 1 & \Cdots & 0 & \Cdots & \hspace{12.5pt} & a[k+1]_{ij} % \CodeAfter \SubMatrix({1-7}{5-7})[slim] % \SubMatrix({7-1}{7-5}) % <-- This fails! \SubMatrix({7-7}{7-7})%[slim] \end{NiceArray}$ $\begin{NiceArray}{*{7}{c}}[cell-space-limits=3pt] & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & a[k]_{mj} \\ & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & a[k]_{m'j} \\ & & & & & & \Vdots \\ & & & & & & \phantom{X} \\ Cdots & 1 & Cdots & 0 & Cdots & \hspace{12.5pt} & a[k+1]_{ij} % \CodeAfter \SubMatrix({1-7}{5-7})[slim] \SubMatrix({7-1}{7-5}) \SubMatrix({7-7}{7-7})%[slim] \end{NiceArray}$ \end{document} PS: for those who are curious, this is just to demonstrate how to calculate the number of paths of known length using an adjacency matrix.

While using [spanish]babel with a KOMA-script class (I've tried with scrartcl and scrbook) I get the following error: LaTeX hooks: Generic hooks cannot be added to '\@startsection'. How can I fix this? Here is my MWE. \documentclass{scrartcl} \usepackage[spanish]{babel} \begin{document} Buenos días. \end{document}

For quite some span of time, I was sure to have solved that problem. I got the build time from the original PDF file, e.g. via pdfinfo. Then i made the next build with SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH using exactly that time. Also FORCE_SOURCE_DATE must be set. This worked with lualatex and PDF 1.7. Now, adding pdfa/A, tagging, PDF/UA and moving on to PDF2.0, it does not work any more. Some experiments show, the critical feature is tagging. It is a great feature and i dont want to do without it. I search for a way to keep reproducibility even if tagging is present. Well, in fact, reproducibility is no longer trustable, sometimes it works. I observe that sometimes the lengths of the files differ minimally. Visually, they are the same, also XMP data seems the same. But my old simple concept of bytewise equivalence is gone. I tried with uncompress as suggested by DavidCarlisle, << /Type /Namespace /NS (data:,AC8956-1B7-A6A9-1928-C381ECC1E1C) >> << /Type /Namespace /NS (data:,5F48FB81-AC9C-B85B-A0B9-890FA89F45CC) >> is the first difference. The next is in a sequence of xref 0 17537 0000000002 65535 f 0007003671 00000 n 0000000003 00000 f But i cannot interprete these... and remarkable that even the trailer IDs coincide. In my dark thougths I even read the PDF spec and found that the trailer ID may depend on the location of the PDF also... So maybe there is another problem I do face only if there are more developers compiling in different environments. Maybe latex compilers dont use location to create the trailer ID, do they? Any advice on a sound foundation for reproducibiliby also in the future? Future is >PDF1.7, and PDF/A, PDF/UA, including tagging.

Is there a reference on how to make tables better, or a more standard way of pre-contemplating them? I was trying to tabulate the elementary linear transformations, and noticed that my table was rather unaesthetic. My hope is that someone could guide me on how I could better pre-contemplate these tables, so that they don't come out looking like this: \documentclass[letterpaper]{book} \usepackage{nicematrix} \usepackage{booktabs} \usepackage{tikz} \usepackage{microtype} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{unicode-math} \newcommand{\temp}{% \begin{tikzpicture} \draw (-1,-1) rectangle (1,1); \node at (0,0) {Blah.}; \end{tikzpicture}% } \begin{document} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{lll} \toprule Linear transformation & Example Matrix & Geometric effect \\ \midrule Scale & \({\begin{bNiceArray}{cc} t & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{bNiceArray}}\) & \temp \\ \midrule Shear & \({\begin{bNiceArray}{cc} 1 & t \\ 0 & 1 \end{bNiceArray}}\) & \temp \\ \midrule Swap & \({\begin{bNiceArray}{cc} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{bNiceArray}}\) & \temp \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \caption{The elementary matrices are blah blah blah.} \label{table:chap-elem-mat} \end{table} \end{document}

Activating line numbers on a latex document, causes text highlighted using the \hl command to disappear. Here is a minimal example: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{lipsum} \usepackage{soul} \usepackage{xcolor} \usepackage[left]{lineno} \linenumbers \begin{document} Conflict between \verb|\hl| and \verb|\linenumbers| commands \section{First section} \hl{This text will be hidden when line numbers are activated}. \lipsum[1] \end{document} Here are screenshots before and after activating line numbers. Thanks

I have the following code to plot the "outer" semicircle: \documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone} \usetikzlibrary{calc} % https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/666441/322482 \newcommand*\drawSemicircle[3][]{% \coordinate (mid) at ($(#2)!0.5!(#3)$); \draw[#1] (#2) let \p{A} = ($(#2)-(mid)$), \p{B} = ($(#3)-(mid)$), \n{cross} = {\x{A}*\y{B} - \y{A}*\x{B}}, \n{angA} = {atan2(\y{A},\x{A})}, \n{angB} = {atan2(\y{B},\x{B})}, \n{R} = {veclen(\x{A},\y{A})}, \n{start} = {(\n{cross}>0 ? \n{angA} : \n{angB})}, \n{endraw} = {(\n{cross}>0 ? \n{angB} : \n{angA})}, \n{end} = {(\n{endraw} < \n{start} ? \n{endraw} + 360 : \n{endraw})} in arc[start angle=\n{start},end angle=\n{end},radius=\n{R}]; } \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture} \foreach \x in {1,...,60}{ \node[circle,draw=magenta,thick] (in-\x) at ({\x*6}:5cm) {}; \node[circle,draw=teal,thick] (out-\x) at ({\x*6}:5.5cm) {}; } \foreach \pstart[evaluate=\pstart as \pend using {int(mod(\pstart+9,60)+1)}] in {1,...,60}{ \drawSemicircle[semithick]{in-\pstart}{out-\pend} % \node[fill=white,circle,label={[label distance=-2em,text=magenta]\pstart*6:\pstart}] at (in-\pstart) {};%<-not elegant here % \node[fill=white,circle,label={[label distance=+1em,text=teal]\pstart*6:\pstart}] at (out-\pend) {}; } \end{tikzpicture} \end{document} Which gives: However, when I substitute: \node[circle,draw=teal,thick] (out-\x) at ({\x*6}:5.5cm) {}; with \node[circle,draw=teal,thick] (out-\x) at ({\x*6}:6cm) {}; Things broken, I guess that it's something like angle float error.... But I don't know how to fix this:

I try to use tikz to plot the following image ... \documentclass[border=0.2cm]{standalone} \usepackage{pgfplots} \usepgfplotslibrary{colormaps} \pgfplotsset{compat = newest} \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture} \begin{axis}[ axis equal image, grid = both, minor tick num = 2, xlabel = {$x$}, ylabel = {$y$}, zlabel = {$z$}, major grid style = {draw = lightgray}, minor grid style = {draw = lightgray!25}, xmin = 0, xmax = 1, ymin = 0, ymax = 1, zmin = 0, zmax = 2, scale = 3, view = {60}{30}, samples = 30, samples y = 30, z buffer = sort, ] % Kjeglesektor \addplot3[ surf, shader = interp, opacity = 0.75, colormap/viridis, ] ({x},{y},{sqrt(3)*sqrt(x^2+y^2)}); \end{axis} \end{tikzpicture} \end{document} But I do not get similar image ... can you please help me?

I want to automatically transliterate titles and author names I'm citing if they're written in another script. For example, given an author named مَحْمُود, I would like to be able to cite them inline as "(مَحْمُود maḥmūd 2020)". Supposing this author wrote a paper titled أَبْجَد هَوَّز, I would like to be able to cite it inline as "أَبْجَد هَوَّز ʾabjad hawwaz (مَحْمُود maḥmūd 2020)". Ideally the compiled bibliography should show these transliterations as well. I've written a Lua module transliteration.lua that exports a function transliterate() such that, for example, transliterate('مَحْمُود') returns the string 'maḥmūd'. However, I can't figure out where or if it's even possible to call my transliteration.transliterate() function within my paper in order for it to correctly apply to biblatex citations. This seems to interact in a complex way with the need to compile multiple times in order to format references correctly. Is there a combination of control sequences and compilation steps that will net exactly the citation formats I've described above? Is there a low-level way to override how names and titles and such are generated such that I can continue to use the default \cite(s), \parencite(s), \autocite(s), \citeauthor, etc. commands without redefining my own? This differs from prior transliteration questions like Auto transliteration in that I don't wish to directly write text in the other script. A question that seemed related was biblatex: Use field value in tex document before compilation but I couldn't figure out how to apply it to my situation. Below is a non-functioning example that demonstrates a rudimentary (and incorrect) understanding of \latelua, \expandafter, \DeclareCiteCommand, etc. (For demonstration, this is generic string substitution without reference to a specific script except in the comment about babel.) I am compiling this with the VSCode Latex Workshop extension's latexmk (lualatex) recipe, which as of writing runs latexmk -synctex=1 -interaction=nonstopmode -file-line-error -lualatex -outdir=%OUTDIR% %DOC%. -- transliteration.lua local exports = {} exports.transliterate = function(text) text = text:gsub("bb", "cc") text = text:gsub("aa", "bb") return text .. ' (this parenthetical indicates that the translit function ran)' end return exports \documentclass{article} \usepackage{biblatex} \directlua{tr = require("transliteration.lua")} \begin{filecontents}[overwrite]{test.bib} @misc{test, author = "aa", title = "bb", year = 2020} \end{filecontents} \addbibresource{test.bib} \DeclareCiteCommand{\translitciteauthor}{}{\directlua{tex.print(tr.transliterate("\\printnames{author}"))}}{}{} \begin{document} 1 % runs function but does not transliterate % additionally, if including babel and using an RTL script, this throws a "missing number, treated as zero" \directlua{tex.print(tr.transliterate("\\citeauthor{test}"))} 2 % runs function but does not transliterate \directlua{tex.print(tr.transliterate("\\expandafter{\\citeauthor{test}}"))} 3 % does nothing \latelua{pdf.print(tr.transliterate("\\citeauthor{test}"))} 4 % runs function but does not transliterate \translitciteauthor{test} \end{document}

I have the following code, but I can’t manage to replicate the figure shown in the attached image. Could you help me with the code and provide the figure? Thank you very much. \documentclass[12pt]{article} % --- Márgenes (opcional) --- \usepackage[margin=2.2cm]{geometry} % --- Idioma y acentos --- \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage[spanish]{babel} % --- Matemática y TikZ --- \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb} \usepackage{xcolor} \usepackage{tikz} \usetikzlibrary{arrows.meta,calc,3d} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \begin{center} % --- TU FIGURA --- \begin{tikzpicture}[ scale=1.15, line cap=round, line join=round, x={(-0.95cm,-0.55cm)}, % Eje X: oblicuo hacia abajo-izquierda y={(1.15cm,0cm)}, % Eje Y: horizontal z={(0cm,1.15cm)} % Eje Z: vertical ] % Colores/estilos \definecolor{axisblue}{RGB}{20,90,130} \tikzset{ axis/.style={very thick, draw=axisblue, -Latex}, proj/.style={dashed, black, line width=0.8pt}, edge/.style={black, line width=0.9pt}, face/.style={draw=black, fill=gray!35, opacity=0.55}, topface/.style={draw=black, fill=gray!25, opacity=0.55}, frontface/.style={draw=black, fill=gray!45, opacity=0.55} } % Ejes \draw[axis] (0,0,0) -- (4.8,0,0) node[below left] {Eje X}; \draw[axis] (0,0,0) -- (0,5.4,0) node[right] {Eje Y}; \draw[axis] (0,0,0) -- (0,0,4.8) node[above] {Eje Z}; % Título \node[anchor=west] at (0.9,2.4,4.0) {\Large Gráfico de $g(x,y)=x$}; % -------- PRISMA 1: x in [0,1], y in [-1,1], altura 1 -------- \def\xa{0}\def\xb{1} \def\ya{-1}\def\yb{1} \def\hA{1} % Vértices base \coordinate (A1) at (\xa,\ya,0); \coordinate (B1) at (\xb,\ya,0); \coordinate (C1) at (\xb,\yb,0); \coordinate (D1) at (\xa,\yb,0); % Vértices top \coordinate (A1t) at (\xa,\ya,\hA); \coordinate (B1t) at (\xb,\ya,\hA); \coordinate (C1t) at (\xb,\yb,\hA); \coordinate (D1t) at (\xa,\yb,\hA); % Proyecciones (sombras) al plano z=0 \draw[proj] (A1) -- (A1t); \draw[proj] (B1) -- (B1t); \draw[proj] (C1) -- (C1t); \draw[proj] (D1) -- (D1t); % Caras visibles \filldraw[frontface] (A1) -- (B1) -- (B1t) -- (A1t) -- cycle; % cara "frontal" \filldraw[face] (B1) -- (C1) -- (C1t) -- (B1t) -- cycle; % cara derecha \filldraw[topface] (A1t) -- (B1t) -- (C1t) -- (D1t) -- cycle; % tapa % Aristas principales \draw[edge] (A1) -- (B1) -- (C1) -- (D1) -- cycle; \draw[edge] (A1t) -- (B1t) -- (C1t) -- (D1t) -- cycle; \draw[edge] (A1) -- (A1t); \draw[edge] (B1) -- (B1t); \draw[edge] (C1) -- (C1t); \draw[edge] (D1) -- (D1t); % Etiquetas \node at (\xa,\ya,\hA) [above left] {$1$}; \node at (0.55,0, -0.02) [below, yshift=-2pt] {$[0,1]\times(-1,1)$}; % -------- PRISMA 2: x in [2,3], y in [-1,1], altura 2 -------- \def\xc{2}\def\xd{3} \def\hB{2} \coordinate (A2) at (\xc,\ya,0); \coordinate (B2) at (\xd,\ya,0); \coordinate (C2) at (\xd,\yb,0); \coordinate (D2) at (\xc,\yb,0); \coordinate (A2t) at (\xc,\ya,\hB); \coordinate (B2t) at (\xd,\ya,\hB); \coordinate (C2t) at (\xd,\yb,\hB); \coordinate (D2t) at (\xc,\yb,\hB); % Proyecciones \draw[proj] (A2) -- (A2t); \draw[proj] (B2) -- (B2t); \draw[proj] (C2) -- (C2t); \draw[proj] (D2) -- (D2t); % Caras \filldraw[frontface] (A2) -- (B2) -- (B2t) -- (A2t) -- cycle; \filldraw[face] (B2) -- (C2) -- (C2t) -- (B2t) -- cycle; \filldraw[topface] (A2t) -- (B2t) -- (C2t) -- (D2t) -- cycle; % Aristas \draw[edge] (A2) -- (B2) -- (C2) -- (D2) -- cycle; \draw[edge] (A2t) -- (B2t) -- (C2t) -- (D2t) -- cycle; \draw[edge] (A2) -- (A2t); \draw[edge] (B2) -- (B2t); \draw[edge] (C2) -- (C2t); \draw[edge] (D2) -- (D2t); % Etiquetas \node at (\xc,\ya,\hB) [above left] {$2$}; \node at (2.55,0,-0.02) [below, yshift=-2pt] {$[2,3]\times(-1,1)$}; % Marcas -1 y 1 sobre eje Y (opcional) \node at (0,-1,0) [below] {$-1$}; \node at (0, 1,0) [below] {$1$}; \end{tikzpicture} \end{center} \end{document}

I was wondering why there's a different polarity used in EU vs american symbols for voltage sources. As one can see the eu version and the american version have oposite polarity, which make's it hard once you start mixing circuits with a EU base and american base. example: \documentclass[a4paper,11pt]{article} \usepackage{circuitikz} \usepackage{siunitx} %\sisetup{locale = DE} % komma als decimaalteken (optioneel) \begin{document} \begin{circuitikz}[american] \draw (0,0) to[V=10V] (2,0); \end{circuitikz} \begin{circuitikz}[european] \draw (0,0) to[V=10V] (2,0); \end{circuitikz} \begin{circuitikz} \draw (0,0) to[V=10V] (2,0); \end{circuitikz} \end{document} So I get a polarity swap between EU and american If a read the manual it should not invert (image/code 1 vs 3 )

I am making the following table using LaTeX. One way to do it is to make a separate row for the "Top Header" header. However, this results in space below that header and the "sub headers": \documentclass{article} \usepackage{booktabs} \begin{document} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{ll rr} \toprule (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) \\ \midrule & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Top Header} \\ \cmidrule(lr){3-4} Main & Main & \\ Header 1 & Header 2 & Sub 1 & Sub 2 \\ \midrule 0.01 & 0.25 & 0.05 & 0.00 \\ 0.02 & 0.25 & 0.11 & 0.03 \\ 0.05 & 0.25 & 0.16 & 0.09 \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table} \end{document} An alternative way is to include "Top Header" on the same line as the top line of the "Main Headers", but the use of \cmidrule creates awkward space for the two "Main Headers": \documentclass{article} \usepackage{booktabs} \begin{document} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{ll rr} \toprule (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) \\ \midrule Main & Main & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Top Header} \\ \cmidrule(lr){3-4} Header 1 & Header 2 & Sub 1 & Sub 2 \\ \midrule 0.01 & 0.25 & 0.05 & 0.00 \\ 0.02 & 0.25 & 0.11 & 0.03 \\ 0.05 & 0.25 & 0.16 & 0.09 \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table} \end{document} A third way, with no \cmidrule gets the vertical spacing right, but I do want a to use \cmidrule to get a line under "Top Header": \documentclass{article} \usepackage{booktabs} \begin{document} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{ll rr} \toprule (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) \\ \midrule Main & Main & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Top Header} \\ Header 1 & Header 2 & Sub 1 & Sub 2 \\ \midrule 0.01 & 0.25 & 0.05 & 0.00 \\ 0.02 & 0.25 & 0.11 & 0.03 \\ 0.05 & 0.25 & 0.16 & 0.09 \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular} \end{table} \end{document} How can I get columns 1 and 2 to behave as in the first table, but columns 3 and 4 to behave as in the second table? In other words, I'd like the headers to take up two lines, as in the second table, and I'd like to use the \cmidrule command for columns 3 and 4, but I don't want the the extra space in between "Main" and "Header 1" and "Main" and "Header 2" that we see in the second table.

I found that the behaviour of the voltage/distance from node-key varies depending on the component, as can be seen in the mwe below. Is there a fix that I am missing? Also, when I set voltage/distance from node=0 there is still some distance to the actual center of the node (marked in red). I have no idea where this is coming from (maybe a TikZ-thing?). I thought, maybe the inner sep of the nodes was not being accounted for, but after some testing, I found that the distance differs from the standard inner sep of nodes. Does someone have an idea? \documentclass{standalone} \usepackage{tikz} \usepackage[straightvoltages]{circuitikz} \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture} \draw (0,0) to[R,name=R,v=U,voltage/distance from node=0] (2,0); \draw (0,-1) to[open,name=v,v=U,voltage/distance from node=0] (2,-1); \draw (0,-1.25) to[open,v=U,voltage/distance from node=0,open voltage position = legacy] (2,-1.25); \draw[red] (0,0 |- R-Vfrom) -- (R-Vfrom) node[midway,below] {?}; \draw[red] (0,-1) -- (v-Vfrom) node[midway,below] {?}; \end{tikzpicture} \end{document}

\documentclass{article} \usepackage[a4paper,margin=2cm]{geometry} \usepackage[fontset=fandol]{ctex} % 和原环境一致 \usepackage{tikz} \newdimen\X \newdimen\Y \X=89.62253pt \Y=85.35826pt \begin{document} 这里是普通正文。 \begin{tikzpicture}[remember picture,overlay] \node[inner sep=0pt, anchor=north west] at (current page.north west) ++ (\X, -\Y) (posblock-math-test) {SIMPLE}; \end{tikzpicture} \end{document} errlog: ! Package tikz Error: A node must have a (possibly empty) label text. See the tikz package documentation for explanation. Type H <return> for immediate help. ... l.18 + + (\X, -\Y)

What is the correct syntax for placing a voltage arrow precisely between the two input terminals? By the way: To make the whole look nicer, I wanted to increase the pin lengths, but I couldn't manage it. I probably didn't place the current arrow quite correctly either, syntax-wise. \documentclass[margin=5pt, multi=circuitikz]{standalone} \usepackage{circuitikz} \begin{document} \begin{circuitikz} \node [en amp, %Increase pin length: %circuitikz/amplifiers/pin length=<*>, does not work ] (amp1) {}; \node [ocirc] at (amp1.-) {}; \node [ocirc] at (amp1.+) {}; \node [ocirc] at (amp1.out) {}; % v-arrow \draw[blue] ([xshift=-2mm]amp1.-) -- ([xshift=-2mm]amp1.+) node[midway, left] {$U$} node[sloped, currarrow, pos=1, blue] {}; % i-arrow \path[] (amp1.out) to[short, f=$\color{red}I$, color=red] ([xshift=5mm]amp1.out); \end{circuitikz} \end{document}

That which is to be Rendered Pfaff, Johann Friedrich -- Methodus generalis, aequationes differentiarum partialium, nec non aequationes differentiales vulgares, utrasque primi ordinis inter quotcunque variabiles, complete integrandi The Current Effort % -*- mode: latex; TeX-engine: luatex; coding: utf-8 -*- \documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{unicode-math} \setmainfont{STIX Two Text} \setmathfont{STIX Two Math} \begin{document} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 =\,Z &dy+\phantom{p}\zeta & da+\zeta' &db+\zeta'' & dc.\\ \phantom{0}-pX &\phantom{dy}-p\chi & \phantom{da}-p\chi'&\phantom{db}-p\chi''& {}\\ \phantom{0}-\,q & {} & {} & {} & {} \end{array} \end{equation*} \end{document} The Result Discussion The current rendering isn't horrible, but it isn't as disciplined as I would like. Is there deterministic way to arrange content of this kind so that, for example, the '+' aligns vertically with the '-'? Discussion of Suggested Approach My original \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 =\,Z &dy+\phantom{p}\zeta & da+\zeta' &db+\zeta''& dc.\\ \phantom{0}-pX &\phantom{dy}-p\chi & \phantom{da}-p\chi'&\phantom{db}-p\chi''&{}\\ \phantom{0}-\,q & {} & {} & {} &{} \end{array} \end{equation*} Suggested \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|l} \begin{aligned} 0 &= \; Z \\ &- pX \\ &- \;\; q \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dy &+ \;\zeta \\ &- p\chi \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] da &+ \; \zeta' \\ &- p\chi' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] db &+ \;\zeta'' \\ &- p\chi'' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dc. \\ & \end{aligned} \end{array} \end{equation*} This is not as robust as I would like. For example: Variations \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 =\,\frac{Z}{t} &dy+\phantom{p}\zeta & da+\zeta' &db+\zeta''& dc.\\[1.6ex] \phantom{0}-\frac{pX}{2} &\phantom{dy}-p\chi & \phantom{da}-p\chi'&\phantom{db}-p\chi''&{}\\[1.6ex] \phantom{0}-\,\frac{q}{3} & {} & {} & {} &{} \end{array} \end{equation*} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|l} \begin{aligned} 0 &=\,\frac{Z}{t} \\ &-\frac{pX}{2} \\ &- \;\; \,\frac{q}{3} \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dy &+ \;\zeta \\ &- p\chi \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] da &+ \; \zeta' \\ &- p\chi' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] db &+ \;\zeta'' \\ &- p\chi'' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dc. \\ & \end{aligned} \end{array} \end{equation*} I agree that the suggested version is an improvement in appearance to my original version in the specific case. If the content is varied so that different ``cells'' have different heights the horizontal alignment of the array of aligned environments no longer aligns grid rows. Perhaps there is no simple, ideal solution. I am hoping for something that will "naturally" align partitioned grid cells. I've done something similar in the past. The code that produced the following is listed below. I didn't really know what I was doing, I just tried things that I cribbed from this forum until it looked acceptable. % -*- mode: latex; TeX-engine: luatex; coding: utf-8 -*- \documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{unicode-math} \setmainfont{STIX Two Text} \setmathfont{STIX Two Math} \newcommand{\SBRAK}[1]{\left[#1\right]} \newcommand{\ARGS}[1]{\SBRAK{#1}} \newcommand{\CBRACE}[1]{\left\lbrace #1 \right\rbrace} \newcommand{\SPOT}{\smblkcircle} \newcommand{\CONST}[1]{\mathrm{#1}} \newcommand{\FTN}[1]{\mathscr{#1}} % scalar function \newcommand{\FTNA}[2]{\FTN{#1}\ARGS{#2}} \newcommand{\LNF}[1][L]{\mathfrak{#1}} % linear form representative \newcommand{\LNFC}[1][L]{\pmb{\LNF[#1]}} % linear form class \begin{document} \paragraph{My original} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 =\,Z &dy+\phantom{p}\zeta & da+\zeta' &db+\zeta''& dc.\\ \phantom{0}-pX &\phantom{dy}-p\chi & \phantom{da}-p\chi'&\phantom{db}-p\chi''&{}\\ \phantom{0}-\,q & {} & {} & {} &{} \end{array} \end{equation*} \paragraph{Suggested} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|l} \begin{aligned} 0 &= \; Z \\ &- pX \\ &- \;\; q \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dy &+ \;\zeta \\ &- p\chi \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] da &+ \; \zeta' \\ &- p\chi' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] db &+ \;\zeta'' \\ &- p\chi'' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dc. \\ & \end{aligned} \end{array} \end{equation*} \paragraph{Variations} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|c} 0 =\,\frac{Z}{t} &dy+\phantom{p}\zeta & da+\zeta' &db+\zeta''& dc.\\[1.6ex] \phantom{0}-\frac{pX}{2} &\phantom{dy}-p\chi & \phantom{da}-p\chi'&\phantom{db}-p\chi''&{}\\[1.6ex] \phantom{0}-\,\frac{q}{3} & {} & {} & {} &{} \end{array} \end{equation*} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{c|c|c|c|l} \begin{aligned} 0 &=\,\frac{Z}{t} \\ &-\frac{pX}{2} \\ &- \;\; \,\frac{q}{3} \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dy &+ \;\zeta \\ &- p\chi \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] da &+ \; \zeta' \\ &- p\chi' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] db &+ \;\zeta'' \\ &- p\chi'' \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[b] dc. \\ & \end{aligned} \end{array} \end{equation*} \begin{equation*} \begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \begin{aligned}[t]\\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] y&=+\CONST{m}x+\CONST{b} =\FTNA{y}{x} \vphantom{\frac{1}{\CONST{m}}}\\ &=-\frac{\CONST{y}_0}{\CONST{x}_0}x+\CONST{y}_0 % \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] \\\hline \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] % \CONST{m}&=-\frac{\CONST{y}_0}{\CONST{x}_0} =-\frac{\CONST{A}}{\CONST{B}}\\ \CONST{b}&=+\CONST{y}_0 =-\frac{\CONST{C}}{\CONST{B}}\\ 0&=+\CONST{b}+\CONST{m}x-y\vphantom{\frac{\CONST{Y}}{\CONST{m}}} % \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] \\\hline \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] % \LNFC&\doteq\phantom{-} \CBRACE{\CONST{b}:\CONST{m}:-1} \vphantom{\CBRACE{\frac{1}{\CONST{m}}}}\\ &=-\CBRACE{ \CONST{-\CONST{y}_0}:\CONST{\frac{\CONST{y}_0}{\CONST{x}_0}}:1 }\\ &=-\frac{\CBRACE{\CONST{C}:\CONST{A}:\CONST{B}}} {\CONST{B}} \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip]\\ \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}[t]\\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] x&=+\frac{1}{\CONST{m}}y+\CONST{a}=\FTN{x}\ARGS{y}\\ &=-\frac{\CONST{x}_0}{\CONST{y}_0}y+\CONST{x}_0 % \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] \\\hline \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] % \frac{1}{\CONST{m}}&=-\frac{\CONST{x}_0}{\CONST{y}_0} =-\frac{\CONST{B}}{\CONST{A}}\\ \CONST{a}&=+\CONST{x}_0 =-\frac{\CONST{C}}{\CONST{A}}\\ 0&=+\CONST{a}-x+\frac{y}{\CONST{m}} % \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] \\\hline \\[\dimexpr-\normalbaselineskip] % \LNFC&\doteq\phantom{-} \CBRACE{\CONST{a}:-1:\frac{1}{\CONST{m}}}\\ &=-\CBRACE {-\CONST{\CONST{x}_0}:1:\CONST{\frac{\CONST{x}_0}{\CONST{y}_0}}}\\ &=-\frac{\CBRACE{\CONST{C}:\CONST{A}:\CONST{B}}} {\CONST{A}} \end{aligned}\\ \hline \end{array} \end{equation*} \end{document}

Related: This question follows from my previous one about dynamic page margins, where flowfram was suggested as a solution approach from MS-SPO @ms-spo. I'm trying to use the flowfram package to create a LaTeX document with different page layouts matching different background PDFs, as suggested in this comment on my previous question. My setup works well except for one issue: when a paragraph spans across pages with different frame widths, the text on the new page continues using the previous page's frame width, causing misalignment; please see the png attachment! MWE: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{lipsum} % ===== Load packages ===== \usepackage[margin=0pt]{geometry} % Disable geometry's margin control \usepackage{eso-pic, graphicx} \usepackage{flowfram} % ===== Define three page layouts ===== % 1. First page layout \newflowframe[1]{% \dimexpr\paperwidth-66mm\relax}{% width \dimexpr\paperheight-104mm\relax}{% height 52mm}{% left (x-coordinate) 38mm% top (y-coordinate from bottom) }[firstpage] % 2. Odd pages layout (except first) \newflowframe[3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,19,21,23,25,27,29,31]{% \dimexpr\paperwidth-66mm\relax}{% width \dimexpr\paperheight-70mm\relax}{% height 62mm}{% left (x-coordinate) 38mm% top (y-coordinate from bottom) }[oddpage] % 3. Even pages layout \newflowframe[2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30]{% \dimexpr\paperwidth-44mm\relax}{% width \dimexpr\paperheight-64mm\relax}{% height 30mm}{% left (x-coordinate) 34mm% top (y-coordinate from bottom) }[evenpage] % ===== Background images ===== \AddToShipoutPictureBG{ \ifnum\value{page}=1 \put(0,0){\includegraphics[width=\paperwidth,height=\paperheight]{c1b.pdf}} \else \ifodd\value{page} \put(0,0){\includegraphics[width=\paperwidth,height=\paperheight]{c3.pdf}} \else \put(0,0){\includegraphics[width=\paperwidth,height=\paperheight]{c2.pdf}} \fi \fi } % ===== Header/Footer handling (optional) ===== \usepackage{fancyhdr} \pagestyle{fancy} \fancyhf{} % Clear defaults \fancyheadoffset[LE,RO]{0pt} % Ensure headers don't shift \begin{document} \section{earth} \lipsum[1-5] \lipsum*[6-7] \section{universe} \lipsum[1-6] \lipsum*[7-8] \lipsum[1-4] \lipsum*[5-6] \lipsum[1-7] \end{document} The Problem: In the generated PDF, paragraphs that continue from page 1 (width: paperwidth-66mm) to page 2 (width: paperwidth-44mm) still use the wider width on page 2, causing text to overflow or misalign with the background. What I've tried: The flowfram manual mentions using \framebreak to handle this: "If the flow frames are not all of the same width, the change in \hsize will not come into effect until the end of the paragraph. Provide a command to simulate a paragraph break..." However, I'm not sure: Where to insert \framebreak (at potential break points? automatically?) How to use it properly (the manual mentions grouping for \parfillskip and \parskip) If there are better alternatives for handling this Questions: How should \framebreak be used in practice to fix cross-page paragraph width issues? Is there a way to automate this, or must I manually insert break points? Are there alternative approaches within flowfram to handle different frame widths across pages? automatically?

MWE: \documentclass[12pt]{article} \textwidth=3.5in \begin{document} \thispagestyle{empty} \begin{equation} \left( \frac{A}{B} \right) \end{equation} \vspace{35pt} \noindent How to enclose text extending over multiple lines with parentheses (\emph{as if} it were a fraction)? \end{document} The output: I would like to enclose text which extends over two or more lines by an appropriately sized set of parentheses. I have tried using \left( and \right) as if I were in a mathematical environment, such as shown in in the fractional expression. However, this does not work when in a text environment. Using $...$ does not help either. How may I enclose the given text, which extends over two lines, entirely with one set of appropriately sized parentheses?

How do I choose the anchor so that the line starts exactly at the edge at a path-source to[american current source]? \documentclass[margin=5pt, multi=circuitikz]{standalone} \usepackage{circuitikz} \begin{document} \begin{circuitikz}[] %\ctikzset{bipoles/border margin=0.0}% no effect \draw[] (0,0) to[american current source, o-o, name=GS] (2,0); \draw[->] (GS.north east) -- +(45:1); \end{circuitikz} \end{document}

The motivation Pfaff, Johann Friedrich: Methodus generalis, aequationes differentiarum partialium, nec non aequationes differentiales vulgares, utrasque primi ordinis inter quotcunque variabiles, complete integrandi The Problem \documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{unicode-math} \setmainfont{STIX Two Text} \setmathfont{STIX Two Math} \newcommand{\tprime}{\char"2034} % ‴ \newcommand{\qprime}{\char"2057} % ⁗ \begin{document} Prime notation: $x^{\prime},x^{\dprime},x^{\tprime},x^{\qprime}$ \end{document} Obviously, the desired result would be for the triple prime to look like the double prime with one more prime, and to look like the quadruple prime with one less prime. This appears to be a feature of unicode since it appears in browsers, in Kate, in Emacs, (differently un-uniform) in xterm. Is there a way to produce a uniform set of prime, double prime, triple prime, quadruple prime using LuaLaTeX? Preferably with STIX Two. Post Script. I was unaware that $x'''$ would work. I learned to author LaTeX using LyX which is WYSIWYM not WYSIWYG. I rarely compiled what I was writing. My reality was what I saw in LyX.

I ask this question only out of curiousity's sake. I am not actually planning on defining a new command called \cmd because the usual \cs macro has superior syntax. (\cmd<command name, including backslash> and \cs{<command name, omitting backslash>} would print the name of a command.) When defining and testing \cmd, I found a strange error where \cmd\par would issue an error even if \cmd is \long (+m in \NewDocumentCommand). So I think that the argument should accept \par tokens. After some trial and error, I randomly changed \texttt to \ttfamily and the error went away. My question is: Why did this fix the error? I don't understand why \texttt wouldn't work correctly in this case. I provide a MWE below to demonstrate the issue: \documentclass{article} \ExplSyntaxOn \NewDocumentCommand \cmdtesti { +m } { \__module_cmd_test_i:N #1 } \cs_new_protected:Npn \__module_cmd_test_i:N #1 { \group_begin: \ttfamily \token_to_str:N #1 \@ % works correctly when #1 is \par \group_end: } \NewDocumentCommand \cmdtestii { +m } { \__module_cmd_test_ii:N #1 } \cs_new_protected:Npn \__module_cmd_test_ii:N #1 { \texttt { \token_to_str:N #1 \@ } % This gives an error if #1 is \par. } \ExplSyntaxOff \begin{document} \cmdtesti\command % no error \cmdtestii\command % no error \cmdtesti\par % no error % \cmdtestii\par % gives an error % \cmdtestii{\par} % gives an error \end{document}

I am trying to plot the surface $z=x^2-y^2$ with the two curves $(t,0,t^2)$ and $(0,t,-t^2)$, but the curves keep getting filled in, and I can't seem to make it so they appear just as curves in the surface. \documentclass[10pt,t]{beamer} \usepackage{tikz} \usetikzlibrary{calc,arrows.meta,decorations.pathreplacing,positioning,patterns} \usepackage{pgfplots} \pgfplotsset{compat=1.18} \pgfplotsset{ samples=41, samples y=41, filter discard warning=false, unbounded coords=jump, } \begin{document} \begin{frame}%[This is driving me crazy] \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75] \begin{axis}[ title={Graph of $z=x^2-y^2$}, view={45}{30}, width=\linewidth, height=8cm, xlabel={$x$}, ylabel={$y$}, zlabel={$z$}, domain=-2.5:2.5, y domain=-2.5:2.5, samples=31, samples y=31, z buffer=sort, shader=interp, legend style={at={(0.02,0.98)},anchor=north west,draw=none,fill=none,font=\footnotesize}, legend cell align=left ] % surface \addplot3[surf, opacity=0.9] {x^2 - y^2}; \addlegendentry{surface} % x=0 slice \addplot3[ very thick, color=green, variable=t, domain=-2.5:2.5, samples=200 ] (0, t, -t^2); \addlegendentry{$x=0$ slice} % y=0 slice \addplot3[ very thick, color=black, variable=t, domain=-2.5:2.5, samples=200, % samples t=1, t domain=-1:1 ] (t, 0, t^2); \addlegendentry{$y=0$ slice} % tangent plane at (0,0,0): z=0 \addplot3[ surf, shader=flat, draw=none, fill opacity=0.35, domain=-1.5:1.5, y domain=-1.5:1.5, samples=2, samples y=2 ] {0}; \addlegendentry{tangent plane $z=0$} % critical point \addplot3+[only marks, mark=*, mark size=1.5pt] coordinates {(0,0,0)}; \end{axis} \end{tikzpicture} \end{frame} \end{document}

Suppose I am writing an exercise with a amsart enviroment like the one shown in the MWE below, \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article} \usepackage{geometry} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amssymb} \begin{document} Studiare in $(0, 0)$ la continuità, l'esistenza delle derivate parziali e la differenziabilità della funzione \[ f(x, y) = \begin{cases} \dfrac{x^3 + 3x^2y + y^4}{x^2 + y^2} & \text{se } (x, y) \neq (0, 0) \\ 0 & \text{se } (x, y) = (0, 0). \end{cases} \] Studiamo la continuità in $(0,0)$. Si ha \[ |f(x,y)| = \left| \frac{x^3 + 3x^2y + y^4}{x^2+y^2} \right| \leq |x|+3|y|+|y|^2 \] e quando $(x,y)\to(0,0)$ l'ultima diseguaglianza tende a $0$ e anche la funzione di partenza lo sarà. Quindi \[ \lim_{(x,y)\to(0,0)} f(x,y) = 0 = f(0,0), \] cioè $f$ è continua in $(0,0)$. \end{document} and I want to strike out the entire exercise, while preserving any environments created with amsart, as in the image below. I'm searching something without use tcolorbox (mdframed or similar) using simple commands (without package) to create an "oblique rule" .

I wish to make this figure with Tikz. I have tried but I can't make as in figure. Can you please assist me? \documentclass[tikz,border=10pt]{standalone} \usepackage{tikz} \usetikzlibrary{arrows.meta,3d,calc} \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture}[ x={(1cm,0cm)}, y={(0.6cm,0.4cm)}, z={(0cm,1cm)}, >=Stealth ] % Axes \draw[->] (0,0,0) -- (4,0,0) node[below left] {$x$}; \draw[->] (0,0,0) -- (0,4,0) node[below right] {$y$}; \draw[->] (0,0,0) -- (0,0,4) node[left] {$z$}; % Origin \node at (0,0,0) [below left] {$O$}; % Bottom region D \fill[blue!15,opacity=0.6] plot[smooth cycle,variable=\t,domain=0:360] ({2+1.6*cos(\t)}, {2+1.1*sin(\t)}, 0); \node at (2,2,0) [below] {$D$}; % Boundary C' \draw[blue!70,thick,->] plot[smooth cycle,variable=\t,domain=0:360] ({2+1.6*cos(\t)}, {2+1.1*sin(\t)}, 0); \node at (3.8,2,0) {$C'$}; % Vertical dashed lines \foreach \t in {30,110,200,290} { \draw[dashed] ({2+1.6*cos(\t)}, {2+1.1*sin(\t)}, 0) -- ({2+1.6*cos(\t)}, {2+1.1*sin(\t)}, 2.3); } % Surface S : z = f(x,y) \fill[blue!40,opacity=0.7] plot[smooth cycle,variable=\t,domain=0:360] ({2+1.6*cos(\t)}, {2+1.1*sin(\t)}, {2+0.3*sin(\t)}); \node at (1.3,3.2,2.4) {$S$}; \node at (3.2,3.4,2.6) {$z=f(x,y)$}; % Boundary C \draw[blue!80,thick,->] plot[smooth cycle,variable=\t,domain=0:360] ({2+1.6*cos(\t)}, {2+1.1*sin(\t)}, {2+0.3*sin(\t)}); \node at (3.7,2.3,2.2) {$C$}; % Normal vector N \draw[red,very thick,->] (2,2,2.2) -- (2,2,3.6) node[above] {$\mathbf{N}$}; \end{tikzpicture} \end{document} ```

Disclaimer This question is a bit of "do it for me" but there is a histrory behind it, see this question. User Jasper offered me a solution without using pgfplots. I plan to add a bounty as soon as it is possible. Question I want to create diagram with a 3D line plots. The main feature is to have several x axes that share the same y axis. Each x axis has its own F (or z) axis. There are only data points on specific y values (in the example below at +30, +15, 0, -15). In addition, the y axis is reversed (+ and - direction reversed). I need a grid in each F-x plane. Important ist also, that all F axes share the same min and max. Each axis should have a label and the diagram should have a title. The data is given in separate csv files, see example below. The MWE contains the data and plots the data (for testing) using pgfplots. Goal: The goal is to have a plain tikz solution and maybe in addition, a solution based on luadraw or lua-tikz3dtools respectively. I am looking for a easy-to-use custom interface for my plot task. If the result looks as it is created with pgfplots, then I am happy. S!#i, I forgot a key feature (not shown in the hand drawing) In addition to the x-F plots described above, there is ONE plot in the y-F plane (= from left to right). This works, because all F axes share the same min and max. \begin{filecontents*}{y_F_data.csv} y,F -15,20 -14,8 30,-4 \end{filecontents*} \documentclass{article} \usepackage{pgfplots} % ------------------------------- \begin{filecontents*}{x_zero.csv} x,F -30,12 -29,8 30,-4 \end{filecontents*} \begin{filecontents*}{x_neg_one.csv} x,F -30,12 -29,8 30,-4 \end{filecontents*} \begin{filecontents*}{x_pos_one.csv} x,F -30,12 -29,8 30,-4 \end{filecontents*} \begin{filecontents*}{x_pos_two.csv} x,F -30,12 -29,8 30,-4 \end{filecontents*} % ------------------------------- \begin{document} \begin{tikzpicture} \begin{axis}[ axis lines = center, title = {$x_0$}, xlabel = {$x_0$}, ylabel = {$F_0$}, xmin = -30, xmax = 30, ymin = -100, ymax = 100, ] \addplot table [x=x, y=F, col sep = comma] {x_zero.csv}; \end{axis} \end{tikzpicture} \begin{tikzpicture} \begin{axis}[ axis lines = center, title = {$x_{-1}$}, xlabel = {$x_{-1}$}, ylabel = {$F_{-1}$}, xmin = -30, xmax = 30, ymin = -100, ymax = 100, ] \addplot table [x=x, y=F, col sep = comma] {x_neg_one.csv}; \end{axis} \end{tikzpicture} \begin{tikzpicture} \begin{axis}[ axis lines = center, title = {$x_{1}$}, xlabel = {$x_{1}$}, ylabel = {$F_{1}$}, xmin = -30, xmax = 30, ymin = -100, ymax = 100, ] \addplot table [x=x, y=F, col sep = comma] {x_pos_one.csv}; \end{axis} \end{tikzpicture} \begin{tikzpicture} \begin{axis}[ axis lines = center, title = {$x_{2}$}, xlabel = {$x_{2}$}, ylabel = {$F_{2}$}, xmin = -30, xmax = 30, ymin = -100, ymax = 100, ] \addplot table [x=x, y=F, col sep = comma] {x_pos_two.csv}; \end{axis} \end{tikzpicture} \end{document}