Combining multiple math-mode glossary entries

Question

I would like to combine 2 or more math mode glossary entries to form a complete expression in math-mode. Background is a separation of nomenclature and symbols.

I use expressions as in the second variant of this answer: https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/137506/101663

What I would like to get is shown in formula 1 of my MWE. What I get is shown in formula 2. What I suppose might happen is given in formula 3.

Ase one is not allowed (and it in fact doesn't work) to use gls-commands in the optional parameter of a gls the approach given in the manual does NOT help:

$\gls{Falpha}[^2]$

Is there any way to achieve my goal?

MWE:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}

\usepackage[acronym]{glossaries}

\newglossary[fog]{formula}{foi}{foo}{Formula} 

\makeglossaries

\newglossaryentry{mathpart1}{
    name=test, text=x_{ref},
    description=irrelevant, type=formula
} 

\newglossaryentry{mathpart2}{
    name=test2, text=^{abc},
    description=irrelevant2, type=formula
} 

\begin{document}
Desired output:
\[
    x_{ref}^{abc} = 0
\]

Achieved output with gls:
\[
    \gls{mathpart1}\gls{mathpart2} = 0
\]      

Similar behaviour:
\[
    {x_{ref}}^{abc} = 0
\]      
\end{document}

\[ \gls{mathpart1}^{\gls{mathpart2}} = 0 \] works, of course, and just remove the ^ from the abc stuff. I think it is better not to use ^ in the gls - entry — , Mar 27 '16 at 14:50

score 3 · Accepted Answer · 2016-03-29T18:33:13.510

See the improved update below at the end.

I suggest to omit the superscript operator in the gls replacement text and use \gls{foo}^{\gls{foobar}} rather.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}

\usepackage[acronym]{glossaries}

\newglossary[fog]{formula}{foi}{foo}{Formula} 

\makeglossaries

\newglossaryentry{mathpart1}{
    name=test, 
    text={\ensuremath{x_{ref}}},
    description=irrelevant, type=formula
} 

\newglossaryentry{mathpart2}{
    name=test2, 
    text={abc},
    description=irrelevant2, type=formula
} 



\begin{document}
Desired output:
\[
    x_{ref}^{abc} = 0
\]

Achieved output with gls:
\[
\gls{mathpart1}^{\gls{mathpart2}} = 0
\]      

Similar behaviour:
\[
    {x_{ref}}^{abc} = 0
\]      
\end{document}

Update -- According to the O.P. the \glstextentry is expandable, but \gls isn't. Use \glstextentry then.

Since \gls isn't expandable, \gls{foo}\gls{foobar} can't be expanded to something like foo^{foobar}.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}

\usepackage[acronym]{glossaries}

\newglossary[fog]{formula}{foi}{foo}{Formula} 

\makeglossaries

\newglossaryentry{mathpart1}{
    name=test, 
    text={\ensuremath{x_{ref}}},
    description=irrelevant, type=formula
} 

\newglossaryentry{mathpart2}{
    name=test2, 
    text={^{abc}},
    description=irrelevant2, type=formula
} 



\begin{document}
Desired output:
\[
    x_{ref}^{abc} = 0
\]

Achieved output with gls:
\[
\gls{mathpart1}\glsentrytext{mathpart2} = 0
\]      

Similar behaviour:
\[
    {x_{ref}}^{abc} = 0
\]      
\end{document}

Thank you for the quick answer. While that works for this special case in the MWE I loose generality. When later on I decide to e.g. interchange ^ and _ between symbols and nomenclature I need to go through my large document and manually replace things. — 4reigner, Mar 27 '16 at 15:12
@4reigner: Honestly, I don't know whether it's possible at all what you desire. I fear that \gls.. isn't really expandable — , Mar 27 '16 at 15:13
Thank you for the keyword "expandable". According to the doc $\glsentrytext$ is expandable. Replacing $\gls$ by $\glsentrytext$ in my MWE does the trick. Can I somehow accept your comment as the correct answer? — 4reigner, Mar 27 '16 at 21:52
@4reigner: Well, I can change my answer to incorporate \glsentrytext, but comments can't be accepted. — , Mar 28 '16 at 08:03

Combining multiple math-mode glossary entries

1 Answers1

Linked