[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: V0.4 details
- From: Joerg.Knappen@uni-mainz.de
- Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 16:45:10 +0100
Here are some details to the 0.4 release fo the new mathematical fonts:
xma: The thorn in position 251 should be a lowercase thorn (having a
The incomplete differential (d with bar) is still missing. It should
be included both as an upright and a math italic letter
The upright lowercase greek letters need some adjustments
xmb: I am surprised by the two square root signs, which are _smaller_
MX1 than the default one. Personally, I find them rather irritating.
How do the other members of this forum feel?
BTW, do the other mebers of this forum agree with the number and size
steps of the growing delimeters? Are they really all needed (I am in
doubt here)? An argument in favour of many sizes in one font could be,
that one only needs one xmb font for all point sizes. On the other
hand, TeX is not delimited by the absolute number of fonts loaded, but
by the number of math font families. Thus, a package like xscale
is just fine. It also resolves the problems with the many different
heights and depths.
There are some postings on the number of delimiter sizes in the
xmc: What is the rationale to have a cedilla in mathematics?
Why do you keep the tie accent in MSP? It was never designed for
use in mathematics (in fact, Knuth needed it to typeset \t\i\i
once in the TeXbook). It has a strange design (a glyph hanging out of
its bounding box) and isn't really workable. It is now part of the tc
fonts, which also contains now so-called new ties, which are inverted
breve accents in fact.
Since xmf contains an extensible (wide) triangle accent, maybe xmc
should contain the basic form of it?
xmd: Johannes Kuester remarked recently, that the Vinogradov symbols
MS1 should be differentiated from >> and <<. xmd seems the natural place
where they could be added.
Another missing glyph: \VDash (\nVDash is in MS1)
Another missing glyph: \barvee
xme: The scriptscriptstyle long arrows show visibile gaps in my printout and
MS2 on the screen. Probably the pieces should have better overlap.
xmf: Thinking of the design of the multiset brackets: Should they be lens-
MX2 shaped (i. e. the additional vertical stroke also forms the glyph
boundary), or should they be more brace-like (i. e. the curve of the
brace overshoots the second vertical stroke)? Or are the two things
described in fact different characters to be supported? (Compare
the lenses from stmaryrd with the parentheses from blackboard bold
for instance, they show the difference I want to describe above).
For the tortoise shell brackets, the vertical piece should be longer
and the diagonals should have an angle comparable to the angle of the