10
$\begingroup$

I noticed that TraditionalForm does not display as nice in the Manipulate output as in normal notebook. Is there a way to make it look the same?

Here is an example, 

Manipulate[ TraditionalForm[-Derivative[2, 0][u][x, y]-Derivative[0, 2][u][x, y] == f[x, y]], {z, None} ]

and compare the output above to the same command, but without the Manipulate wrapper:

TraditionalForm[-Derivative[2, 0][u][x, y]-Derivative[0, 2][u][x, y] == f[x, y]]

Here is the output, side by side. (left side is the Manipulate output).

enter image description here

There might be an option to correct this inside Manipulate? Will keep looking. But meanwhile, any one knows why that is?

btw, I found that by Rasterizing it, it looks close to the notebook, but need to work on the resolution little:

Manipulate[ Rasterize@ TraditionalForm[-Derivative[2, 0][u][x, y] - Derivative[0, 2][u][x, y] == f[x, y]], {z, None} ]

enter image description here

thanks

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
14
$\begingroup$

This is just a matter of different style (font here). This will produce identical output to what you get outside of Manipulate: 

Manipulate[ Style[ TraditionalForm[-Derivative[2, 0][u][x, y] - Derivative[0, 2][u][x, y] == f[x, y]], FontFamily -> "Times" ], {z, None}]
Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
0
2
$\begingroup$

Just stumbled upon this and thought it's worth adding something here: To avoid having to specify the style for every instance of TraditionalForm output in your Manipulate, you could spell out the font in the BaseStyle option, i.e.:

SetOptions[Manipulate, BaseStyle -> {FontFamily -> "Times New Roman"}]; Manipulate[ TraditionalForm[-Derivative[2, 0][u][x, y] - Derivative[0, 2][u][x, y] == f[x, y]], {z, None}]
Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.