[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Math Arrows and Harpoons, Draft Three
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Math Arrows and Harpoons, Draft Three
- From: Taco Hoekwater <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 18:16:56 +0100 (W. Europe Standard Time)
- Content-Length: 2863
>>>>> "HA" == Hans Aberg <email@example.com> writes:
HA> (I, and perhaps some others, are not on the group
HA> firstname.lastname@example.org, so any responses on this topic there
HA> relevant to the email@example.com group needs to
HA> cc this one.)
tex-nl is addressed only on my announcements. This is the dutch TeX
mailing list, where there are some people that are also interested.
You might be right about the newsgroup, but I don't read netnews, so
it would be hard for me to keep track of the discussions. If someone
else wants to take care of that newsgroup (and possibly others) for
me, I would be much obliged.
HA> On the arrows 000-003 and the short arrows (or arrowhead
HA> components) 011-014, I can not recall any math situation where
HA> the length of an arrow has any semantic significance.
They are in the tables, and other than that they have the advantage
that the TeX macros can use [Uu]p, [Dd]own and [Uu]pdown arrows as
delimiters. Consider this the start of the construction kit, if you
>> - redesigned triangle heads
HA> The arrows 114-116 I think now looks much better. I can note
HA> however that the back of these arrowheads are now bent in the
HA> opposite of the regular arrowheads (009,002,004).
This was necessary, bending in the other direction looked ridiculous.
HA> and it did not have it); I know that 125/127 can be used to
HA> denote an ASCII return on computers.
In fact, 157 is labeled "carriage return".
HA> I am not sure this is all logical: For example one the arrows
HA> 129/174, they look semantically the same to me. I would prefer a
HA> variation looking more like 129, except that I would not require
HA> it to be an exact semicircle, just a bend -- so therefore
HA> something like 174 would be acceptable to me. In addition, I
HA> would use this kind of arrows as a variation of the plain arrow
HA> 002, so therefore 174 seems to be acceptable to me (it should
HA> then come with a mirror reversed version).
129 looks strange to me too. But it just happens to be in
HA> On 137-138, one use is in closed line integrals in physics
HA> (even though these integral signs probably have separate
HA> symbols). So it could be that these should be fully closed
HA> circles with an arrowhead onto. In the case of the line
HA> integrals, the arrowhead should be to the side, not the top, in
HA> order to not be in the way of the integral sign symbol.
There are separate symbols for the closed line integrals. To appear.
HA> The two arrows >->> and <<-< seem to not be present: These are
HA> used in category thoery to indicate that a homomorhism is both
HA> mono and epi (and thus iso in say an Abelian category). (Thus a
HA> head like in 015/017 and a tail as in 009-010.)
One of these is 150, I will add the other one.