[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**:*Thierry Bouche <Thierry.Bouche@ujf-grenoble.fr>***Date**: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 19:56:37 +0100 (MET)**CC**:*michel.bovani@wanadoo.fr*- Content-Length: 1604

» Some may want to use » Blackboard Bold numbers, I think, but I doubt it is used for the other » fonts. We use \mathbb{1}_X here for the characteristic function of the set $X$. Thierry Bouche, Grenoble. PS I looked at a book really considered as giving typesetting Rules in France: the "Lexique des règles en usage à l'imprimerie nationale". It has around 10 pages about maths, science & units typesetting. It begins by general principles: "Caps are always roman, lc italic [variables, unknown, functions, parameters]." Then examples of lc roman are given : abbrev of function names (log,cos,sin...), e, i, abrev of words or proper names (such as N_A [everything upright] for "number of Avogadro") Lots of really badly typeset samples follow... As a matter of fact, it is very easy to tell when you open a maths book in France, when it was done by a professional typographer with Xpress or such (following the IN rules rather closely, usually more coherent and less ambiguous on most notations, but spacing, size of the subscripts, legibility is often bad) or the author with word or tex. Authors appear to be very fuzzy on standards, following the habits of the last paper they read rather than any established tradition. I think this is in favor of true professional typographers, that may normalize authors manuscripts. If you want some idea of the traditional (& experimental...:-) way of typesetting maths in France, you may have a look at some of the files in http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~bouche/frtests PPS is the ratio 1/100 a good one as usefull-for-taco/noise on this list?

- 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):