# [texhax] \ldots v. \cdots

Karl Ove Hufthammer karl at huftis.org
Tue Mar 3 10:31:09 CET 2009

P. R. Stanley:

> I've come across both \ldots and \cdots in typesetting series in \sum
> -- \{1 + 2 + 3 + ldots + n\}. What would the list recommend?

I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the AMS recommendations. The document
‘Short Math Guide for LaTeX’ at http://www.ams.org/tex/amslatex.html says

4.6. Dots For preferred placement of ellipsis dots
(raised or on-line) in various contexts there is no
general consensus. It may therefore be considered a
matter of taste. By using the semantically oriented
commands
* \dotsc for “dots with commas”
* \dotsb for “dots with binary operators/relations”
* \dotsm for “multiplication dots”
* \dotsi for “dots with integrals”
* \dotso for “other dots” (none of the above)
instead of \ldots and \cdots, you make it possible for
the fly, in case (for example) you have to submit it to
a publisher who insists on following house tradition in
this respect. The default treatment for the various kinds
follows American Mathematical Society conventions:

We have the series $A_1,A_2,\dotsc$,
the regional sum $A_1+A_2+\dotsb$,
the orthogonal product $A_1A_2\dotsm$,
and the infinite integral
$\int_{A_1}\int_{A_2}\dotsi$.

--
Karl Ove Hufthammer