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

**To**:*math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk***Subject**:**Re: Binary Relations, draft 1****From**:*Taco Hoekwater <taco.hoekwater@wkap.nl>***Date**: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 00:14:51 +0100 (W. Europe Standard Time)- Content-Length: 1226

>>>>> "HA" == Hans Aberg <haberg@matematik.su.se> writes: >> We are left with the question whether the equilateral triangles are >> relations or operations, with a "probably not" as temporary answer. HA> No, I think that equilateral triangles can be binary operators, like the HA> TeX \triangleleft and \triangleright. These should then be small in size, HA> similar to that of \circ, \bullet and those. Sorry, that was my intended meaning. HA> In addition to the outline binary operations, just as \circ has a filled-in HA> version \bullet, one might think of filled in versions of \triangleleft, HA> \triangleright, and \diamond. These are all in the tables. HA> I have also found that both outline and filled similarly sized and HA> positioned small squares are excellent to use as binary operations. And these too. >> Building on that, we would like to have a variation on the triangles as >> binary relations, and these probably should look like closed succ and >> prec. (with the advantage that these can never be confused with the >> equilateral triangle operators). Am I correct? HA> Yes, that is my suggestion. Ok, will be done. [...the other problems are more or less solved now...] Taco

- Prev by Date:
**Unicode mathematical control characters** - Next by Date:
**Re: Binary Relations, draft 1** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Binary Relations, draft 1** - Next by thread:
**Re: Binary Relations, draft 1** - Index(es):