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

**To**:*math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk***Subject**:**Upward compatibility again****From**:*alanje@cogs.susx.ac.uk (Alan Jeffrey)***Date**: Sun, 22 Aug 93 17:53 BST

More bad news on upward compatibility... As I said a couple of days ago, if we want to be upwardly compatible with user input such as: \[ {\sf \Omega} = {\sf fix\;I} \] then we have to allow five ligature slots in MC. In fact, the situation's worse than that. If we want to be upwardly compatible with user input such as: \[ f : {\bf\Lambda}_0 \rightarrow {\bf B\ddots ohm} \] then the nine variable math accents also need to be in MC. Hmm... MC's looking pretty crowded isn't it... Alan.

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Separate encoding for \log etc** - Next by Date:
**Re: Arrow heights** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Separate encoding for \log etc** - Next by thread:
**math axis** - Index(es):