![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/b79687264c3e06cba13b54d05b12a9f5.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Hi, the \singlebond (as well as the \doublebond and \triplebond) command doesn’t produce a symbol when you put a number after it. \starttext $ l\singlebond r $\crlf $ 1\singlebond 2 $\crlf %$ 1\doublebond 2 $\crlf %$ 1\triplebond 2 $ \stoptext Wolfgang
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/ac3fbaf0a287c4cffbc9f18fa931586c.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:15:33 +0200
Wolfgang Schuster
Hi,
the \singlebond (as well as the \doublebond and \triplebond) command doesn’t produce a symbol when you put a number after it.
\starttext
$ l\singlebond r $\crlf $ 1\singlebond 2 $\crlf %$ 1\doublebond 2 $\crlf %$ 1\triplebond 2 $
\stoptext
Wolfgang
I am not familiar with $\singlebond$ etc. In ConTeXt, one can also use a different mechanism (chem-str.mkiv): \chemical{1,SINGLE,2,DOUBLE,3,TRIPLE,4} Looking at the result of the above, I find that the spacing of DOUBLE should be modified (to .25ex rather than .5ex), a question of aesthetics? Compare this with a third mechanism (mp-chem.mpiv, drawing a chemical structure rather than writing an inline chemical formula): \startchemical \chemical[ONE,Z0,SB1,Z1,MOV1,Z1,DB1,MOV1,Z1,TB1,MOV1,Z1] [1,2,3,4] \stopchemical Ignore that the horizontal spacing is different, too, for the structure ONE. Alan
participants (2)
-
Alan BRASLAU
-
Wolfgang Schuster