Skip to main content
TeX - LaTeX

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • 2
    I agree. Also I personally don't see minimal as a real class, e.g. because of the missing font size commands and missing length settings. A minimal example which uses the minimal class might show different results as a real class so it should be avoided. IMHO minimal is just a "hello world" class. Commented Jun 17, 2011 at 11:11
  • 2
    @Martin: I disagree. When using tikZ or pstricks without having text, it really makes sense to use the minimal class instead of another one. Commented Jun 17, 2011 at 11:15
  • 4
    @Herbert: If you don't have any text, then maybe yes. I normally have some text in my diagram and then I often want to use different sizes. Is there a drawback of article in the no-text case? Commented Jun 17, 2011 at 11:18
  • 4
    @Harald: The absence of the high level font size commands is a big impact on user-friendliness. Of course if you know how to do it then you don't need them. I personally don't know much about the internal font commands, and I'm sure beginners would be totally lost here. I still fail to see the benefit of using minimal in a document with text. Commented Jun 17, 2011 at 13:14
  • 4
    Another (in my opinion big) problem with minimal is that it doesn't assign values to \arraycolsep, \tabcolsep, \arrayrulewidth, \doublerulesep, \fboxsep, \fboxrule so standard environments such as tabular and array won't behave as expected in a class such as article (no separation between columns, no rules, for example). Commented Jun 17, 2011 at 14:18