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

**To**:*Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>***Subject**:**Re: math fonts****From**:*Barbara Beeton <bnb@MATH.AMS.ORG>***Date**: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 09:23:55 -0400- Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
- Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>

johannes kuester writes: ... to include the upright "d" seems arbitrary, as other upright glyphs aren't taken into account. this is not arbitrary, and is there for the same reason that an upright partial sign is included among the "extra greek-like material" -- it is to represent the differential operator, which is upright according to an iso standard for math notation (whose reference number i don't remember at the moment). since that standard was developed by engineers, not mathematicians, actual practice in those two communities may differ, but the fact remains that the upright "d" is standardized and the (more familiar to me) italic "d" is not. -- bb

- Prev by Date:
**Re: math fonts** - Next by Date:
**Re: math fonts** - Prev by thread:
**Re: math fonts** - Next by thread:
**Re: math fonts** - Index(es):