[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Binary Relations, draft 1
- To: Hans Aberg <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: Binary Relations, draft 1
- From: "Y&Y, Inc." <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:02:17 -0500
- Cc: Thierry.Bouche@ujf-grenoble.fr, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Content-Length: 952
I think the discussion of typesetting conventions for constants versus variables
can be extended endlessly, since when you get right down to it there is no
completely unequivocal distinction. What is a constant depends on your frame
of mind --- I think some of the discussion here was already going in that direction.
In any case, it seems like the purpose is not to invent new rules but to deal with
the existing ones if possible in a rational way. Ultimately only to see what glyphs
are needed and whether different `styles' of a glyph have different `semantics'
And I guess the point that there is a need for upright `math italics' has been made.
As has the need for blackboard bold in Unicode (of course the most commonly used
blackboard bold letters already are there, as are some Fraktur symbols and some
Script letters - under `letterlike symbols' IIRC).
Y&Y, Inc. mailto:support@YandY.com http://www.YandY.com