1
$\begingroup$

In my article, I have a plethora of definitions, all of which I have placed in "definition" environments, so that they look like this:

Definition 1.5.2. The foo designator and bar designator denote the strings 'foo' and 'bar' respectively. Let w be a word in the foobar language such that w contains the foo designator as a prefix and the bar designator as a suffix. Then we say w is totally foobar.

The problem is that my paper is strewn with definition environments. I wonder whether a way around this might be to use definition environments for only the most important objects, specifically those to which I will later refer by their definition numbers.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If you are taking the time to state a definition it should be in a definition environment. Also, assuming you are talking about TeX, this question would be better suited for TeX SE. $\endgroup$ – DMcMor Jan 13 at 20:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think they should all be in that environment. Can you collect them in coherent bunches in fewer separate environments? The reader might be pleased to find several related ones in the same place. $\endgroup$ – Ethan Bolker Jan 13 at 20:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There is no need to worry that there are too many definition environments. This is simply a matter of taste. Some people also write a few definitions in (possibly more colloquial) passages without environments and others always use environments (this is what I mostly do). $\endgroup$ – Qi Zhu Jan 13 at 21:04

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.