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

*To*: C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk*Subject*: Re: Unicode and math symbols*From*: "Berthold K.P. Horn" <bkph@ai.mit.edu>*Date*: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 15:12:31 -0500 (EST)*CC*: mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch, BNB@math.ams.org, tex-font@math.utah.edu*Flags*: 000000000000*In-reply-to*: <199702281916.TAA21792@fell.open.ac.uk> (message from ChrisRowley on Fri, 28 Feb 1997 19:16:56 GMT)*Reply-to*: bkph@ai.mit.edu

Berthold Just a few questions to you to clarify matters: Does this dependence of OSs on the Unicode standard mean that whenever Unicode changes, everyone needs a new version of the OS or just new font-files, or what? I guess I forgot to answer this: Yes, it has already happened the T1 installer in NT maps fi and fl to F001 and F002 (UNICODE 1.1.x) while ATM NT maps them to FB01 and FB02 (UNICODE 2.0). This is why it is so important to get as many of these issue resolved *long* before anyone ever starts using this sort of stuff. Like if we decide in the next millenium that UNICODE may be useful for TeX, then it would be too late to agitate for inclusion of additional characters at *that* point. Berthold.

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Unicode and math symbols***From:*"Martin J. Duerst" <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>

**Re: Unicode and math symbols***From:*Chris Rowley <C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk>

**References**:**Re: Unicode and math symbols***From:*Chris Rowley <C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Unicode and math symbols** - Next by Date:
**Re: Unicode and math symbols** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Unicode and math symbols** - Next by thread:
**Re: Unicode and math symbols** - Index(es):