You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently it is possible to write prescripts and postscripts (e.g. tensors) using empty groups {::}_a{::}^b C {::}_d {::}^e. Not only is the syntax clunky, but the markup this generates is wrong which might have accessibility implication.
Proposal
A proposed tensor notation would fix that:
All groups that start with ^ or _ will be parsed as pre- or postscripts.
Any ^ within the group will start a new upper index and any _ will start a lower index.
, will skip to the next index position. That is without the comma, a lower and upper index are allowed in the same index position, with it you can move straight to the next position (see examples).
If preceded by a whitespace (or first in a group/sentence) the group will be prescripts, otherwise it will be postscripts.
Currently it is possible to write prescripts and postscripts (e.g. tensors) using empty groups
{::}_a{::}^b C {::}_d {::}^e
. Not only is the syntax clunky, but the markup this generates is wrong which might have accessibility implication.Proposal
A proposed tensor notation would fix that:
^
or_
will be parsed as pre- or postscripts.^
within the group will start a new upper index and any_
will start a lower index.,
will skip to the next index position. That is without the comma, a lower and upper index are allowed in the same index position, with it you can move straight to the next position (see examples).Examples
Use
,
to skip to next index position (i.e. normal tensor indices).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: