[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: patch for bigdoc.tex, fontchart.sty
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: patch for bigdoc.tex, fontchart.sty
- From: Matthias Clasen <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 14:55:06 +0100
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> P.S. There was a Mathematica 3.0 presentation at our university
> today. It appears that none of their sales representatives have
> a clue as to the status of their font licensing. They advised
> me to get in touch with them by e-mail about specific questions.
Speaking about the mathematica fonts, looking at the result of
testdoc.tex with the mathematica layout, I noticed that the accents
are all wrong, since they live at the baseline, not the x-height,
in the mathematica fonts. I fixed this by raising all accents to
the x-height in the vf. I don't have the patch here though.
Another small thing which went wrong in the last release is the
order of the new delimiters.
One more thing: Some days ago I saw a request for a mirrored \iota
on de.comp.text.tex. The requester was quoting W.V.O.Quine with the
statement that this symbol is used `since Peano' for the `the'-functor
(i.e. the functor turning a formula \varphi(x) into a term denoting
the unique element fulfilling that formula: \inviota x\varphi(x) is
`the' x satisfying \varphi). Since I am working in mathematical logic
myself, I can confirm the statement. I think \inviota would be a more
useful addition the the `greek half' of MC than the exotic greek numerals
or \varbeta, which have been removed in the latest release (by Ulriks
reorganization of MC/MSP/MS1). If wanted, I can dig up references for
the actual use of \inviota in the literature.
So what do you think ?