Thank you and no worries about any “delay”.
It looks like the issue is that you have a line break after the suffix $$ in the second example.
Do you mean a line break before the suffix $$? I think that explains it. I have one between line 7 and 8 on the second example and deleting that solves the problem:
I still think this behaviour is wonky. Why does a line break between line 7 and 8, in the equation (which in latex typically has no effect, so people would not expect it) acts as if there is a line break between lines 6 and 7?
I don’t understand your example. In your picture, if I see correctly, the equation name “The DGP is a monthly VAR” is rendered. In my case it is not. As far as I see in your example, the difference is that in the second case there is no break after $$ and ^testsaf. This does not reproduce the behaviour on my end.
And thanks for the link to the thread regarding my original question. I read through and as far as I understood:
- there is a suggested workaround with headings. Headings are a totally different thing for me and I would not put a heading for every equation. Also I do not want equations in the table of contents. The atomic notes (my current workaround) is better but not optimal
- this would not be considered (at least not currently). I really think, that introducing opening and closing synthax is an elegant solution, as suggested in those topics.
Did I understand the discussion correctly?
I see that the discussion has been marked as resolved. I still have no idea how to create a complex block with multiple equations which is not an atomic note.