[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: new delimiters

Michael Downes says 

>Or, maybe it means that the issue of choosing larger sizes of
>delimiters is orthogonal to encoding issues: the new math encoding
>should perhaps only specify the font position of the first delimiter
>in the nextlarger chain and somehow leave the mechanism for getting
>the larger sizes open to local variation.

I'd support this wholeheartedly!  We should, however, specify the
positions of the extensible versions, so that users can specify that
they want the extensible delimiter to avoid situations describe by
J"org, where in two adjacent formulae one gets an extensible delimiter
and the other doesn't.

>and they want to add extra interpolated sizes of ()<>; as things
>currently stand they would not be able to do this without departing
>from the standard encoding, unless the standard encoding were to
>reserve extra font positions for this possibility. 

We can always reserve some slots as being `for ligatures or extensible
glyphs' for use by font implementors.  All we then need to do is hire
a squad of goons to go round and make sure nobody misuses them to add
in other glyphs :-)