Let us see the following code:
\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
\begin{theorem}
TFAE
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
$0<1$;
\item[(ii)]
$1>0$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
But I want (i)'s Roman:
\begin{theorem}
TFAE
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textrm{(i)}]
$0<1$;
\item[\textrm{(ii)}]
$1>0$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
Alas, still italic, but\ldots
\begin{theorem}
TFAE
\begin{itemize}
\item[\rm(i)]
$0<1$;
\item[\rm(ii)]
$1>0$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\end{document}
And \textrm
, which should be better than an obsolete \rm
(I know the differences of using them) doesn't work as one can expect. Is it an argument for using \rm
from time to time?
enumitem
, you could use\begin{enumerate}[label=\upshape(\roman*)]
.memoir
class and the KOMA-Script classes issue warnings if any of those deprecated commands is used. KOMA-Script announced that it will even remove the definitions for those commands in one of the next releases...enumerate
instead of misusingitemize
like this. There are others reading this site, and we'd rather not have them getting the idea that this is a good methodology.[(i)]
(theshortlabels
option) to include the\upshape
or\textnormal{...}