[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: distribution of symbols on MSP/MS1
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: distribution of symbols on MSP/MS1
- From: Matthias Clasen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:44:29 +0200
- Cc: email@example.com
Ulrik Vieth wrote:
> I wanted to come back to this issue and prepare and alternative
> proposal for the distribution of symbols in MSP/MS1 anyhow.
Feel free to do so. Personally, I'm a bit tired of font-table-reshuffling
by now...for a change, I'll probably try to create glyphs for some of the
missing bigops in MX2.
> P.S. Would there be any significant advantage in trying to place all
> the LASY glyphs into the MSP, so that not only LaTeX base, but also
> LaTeX base + lasy could be implemented in 4 families, thereby making
> it possible to provide the full LaTeX 2.09 symbol complement with one
> family less than previously required. It appears that all it would
> take is relocating the triangles from MS1 to MSP, while some of the
> AMS glyphs, e.g. the sub/superset-or-not-equals group could easily be
> moved to MS1 to make room.
Why not, if you are going to reorganize MSP/MS1 anyway.
PS. When did the name MSP/math symbol priviledge come up ? I have noticed
that the paper by Alan Jeffrey, mgaston.tex, speaks about MS1/MS2/MS3.
What exactly is the priviledge ?