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

**To**:*Thierry Bouche <Thierry.Bouche@ujf-grenoble.fr>***Subject**:**Re: Binary Relations, draft 1****From**:*Chris Rowley <C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk>***Date**: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 16:45:38 +0000 (GMT)**Cc**:*math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk*- Content-Length: 1445

Thierry Bouche wrote -- > » And the symbol "a" from the word "a". > > do you realize that most theorems are typeset in italics, whereas most > proofs are typeset in roman? Amazingly enough, this fact had impinged on my consciousness during the years (probably more than you have had birthdays) during which I have been reading, writing and editing maths. However, in the large quantity of mathematical works on whose typographic design I have had a lesding influence you will not see this user-unfriendly convention used. Is this also done in French texts? It may not make too much difference to non-native readers of English but it is a considerable nuisance to native readers, especially when scanning a theorem to see roughly wht it is saying: the fine structure is massivley more difficult to elucidate. > > Are you following Knuth's suggestion that text italics should be > clearly different from math italic (not only via special spacing, but > even by special shape, as the infamous \sl ?). That does help a bit when using TeX and CM fonts but I do not think that the two are very much related. > > If a math text is well written, sich mistakes are impossible, same > alphabet used or not. I am sure you are right but, regrettably, it is a theory for which there exists no test data. Please show me a "well written math text"; then I shall be able to die happy ... Meanwhile maybe we should get back to helping Taco? chris

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Binary Relations, draft 1** - 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):