[texhax] Formatting \subsubsection
bnb at ams.org
bnb at ams.org
Wed Jul 2 16:57:38 CEST 2014
On Sun, 29 Jun 2014, Mike Makai wrote:
Is it possible to change the \subsubsection in amsbook so that the vertical space after the subsubsection be as big as desired?
there have been several answers to
your question already, and all of
them are reasonable.
here's what the ams position is, more
or less. (i'm responding not as the
official spokesperson, but on the
basis of lots of experience.)
the ams document classes are designed
to meet the ams design specifications.
amsbook implements the "basic" style,
but there are particular series that
have quite different styles, and an
author writing for a specific series
is expected to refrain from modifying
the style, but use the dedicated
"author package". (there are quite
a few author packages. (they can be
retrieved via links at
they aren't posted to ctan.) each
<series>.cls loads one of the three
"basic" class files and modifiex it
to yield the desired "series specific"
since the three "basic" classes are
included in the "required" latex
collection, and licensed under the
lppl, it is of course assumed that
if someone wants to change the style
as provided, they are free to do so.
just please don't modify the .cls
file itself and redistribute it under
the same name; that would do a serious
disservice to unsuspecting users.
the two recommended ways to introduce
- create a "derivative" class file
in a manner similar to what's done
by the ams author packages, or
- place the modifying code in your
of course, the method chosen depends
on how much use the modified style
is expected to get.
changes at the basic level, whichever
method is chosen, do assume that the
person making the modifications is
"literate" in the use of \renewcommand
and \def at quite a low level.
a number of common/popular packages
are *not* compatible with the ams
classes, often because the ams classes
implement certain features in a manner
different from the "basic" classes
book, article and proc, since the
requirements of ams publications are
different from what is done there.
this incompatibility (other than the
essential style differences) is *not*
intentional, but is mainly the result
of absence of communication between
package authors (also unintentional).
the ams author handbook is being
updated, and, when released, will list
the (non-ams) packages that are known
to be incompatible with the ams classes.
More information about the texhax