4

The Plain TeX

$$ \sum_{i \in S \atop j \in T} i $$

seems to be usually typeset mathematically in LaTeX using the \substack macro from the AMS maths macros (accessed using \usepackage{amsmath})

\[ \sum_{\substack{i \in S\\ j \in T}} i \]

which gives slightly different results, most importantly in that the subscripts are scriptsized in the latter, but scriptscriptsized in the former.

Results like these can be obtained in ConTeXt using matrices, e.g.:

\def\scriptsize{\switchtobodyfont[7pt]}
\startformula
\sum_{\startmathmatrix
    \NC \scriptsize i \in S \NR
    \NC  \scriptsize i \in T \NR
    \stopmathmatrix}
  i
\stopformula

But this is clunky (not to mention my code above giving ugly spacing) and defining a macro to do this risks being ad hoc. Is there an attractive and idiomatic way to do this in ConTeXt? I'd be most interested in a reasonably well-established way of translating AMS maths into ConTeXt.

6

You can use \startsubstack … \stopsubstack. The mathalign manual for a more detailed description and examples of this command.

\starttext
\startformula
   \sum_{\startsubstack
      i \in S \NR
      i \in T \NR
      \stopsubstack
    }i
\stopformula
\stoptext
| improve this answer | |
  • Good - that looks much better. It's funny that searching the contextgarden.net wiki for substack did not come up with that. – Charles Stewart Dec 10 '12 at 14:33
  • Feel free to improve it, it's wiki! – Marco Dec 10 '12 at 15:18
  • I've created a stub: wiki.contextgarden.net/Command/startsubstack . Be cool if somebody could add a description, possibly expand the See Alsos. – Esteis Dec 11 '12 at 12:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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