TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

How can I prevent a page break before a run-in section heading while preserving vertical spacing before the heading?

Based on the suggestion in How to prevent a page break before an itemize list?, I have defined a run-in heading as

                                         {2.1ex \@plus1ex \@minus 0.64ex}{-1em}%

I use this heading in the following way:

..., but the process assignment is still in bijective
correspondence with the proof rules.

\nobreakruninheading*{Cut reduction as computation.}
The principal cut reduction is
\text{several lines of math go here}
When annotated according to the process interpretation,
we can extract the process reduction

Indeed, LaTeX does not insert a page break before the run-in heading. However, there is no vertical space between the end of the paragraph (... with the proof rules.) and the run-in heading.

I do know that there is enough room on the page with 1.6ex of vertical space prior to the heading because if I instead define \nobreakruninheading* as \vspace{1.6ex}\noindent{\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries #1}\hspace{1em}, everything fits the way I want. I'd like to avoid resorting to this alternate definition, if possible, because it does not match the other section headings in my paper (which use \@startsection).

share|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

My feeling is that if you want vertical space before the runin heading, then a page break is good as well.

Anyway, you get what you ask by adding the spacing after \nobreak:

                                         {2.1ex \@plus1ex \@minus 0.64ex}{-1em}%
share|improve this answer
I would certainly agree that normally a page break should be good as well. This is for a conference submission, though, and space is very tight; it seems that a page break here is the critical point that pushes the paper over the page limit. I wish I didn't have to resort to this kind of hackery... – Henry DeYoung Jun 27 '12 at 17:08
Your solution is just the ticket; thanks! – Henry DeYoung Jun 27 '12 at 17:20

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.