reconsider name- about laml-wc HOT 4 CLOSED

Back in laml days, I liked making theorems sections. Nowawdays I think figure elements are more appropriate. A particular case are proofs but amsmath style guide suggests proof envs are for short proofs, sections for long proofs. Still, we could make a switch to make proofs sections vs figures.

from laml-wc.

I'll go with restricting name- to sectioning elements. I'll clean those up in general.

I think (for now) my concern about needing a custom element is unwarranted -- ref- usually doesn't need to include the counter.

from laml-wc.

Was supposed to get closed by a2c8780 (typo in commit message prevented auto-close).

However, there are still some name- elements around in proofs and theorems.

from laml-wc.

I think (for now) my concern about needing a custom element is unwarranted -- ref- usually doesn't need to include the counter.

On second thought, if we want "Theorem 2.1", we'd need to access the counter. Sigh.

from laml-wc.