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

*To*: mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch*Subject*: Re: Unicode and math symbols*From*: "Berthold K.P. Horn" <bkph@ai.mit.edu>*Date*: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 15:53:47 -0500 (EST)*CC*: C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk, BNB@math.ams.org, tex-font@math.utah.edu*Flags*: 000000000000*In-reply-to*: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.970228214613.248R-100000@enoshima>(mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch)*Reply-to*: bkph@ai.mit.edu

From: "Martin J. Duerst" <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch> Inclusion of additional characters, in particular genuinely new (in the sense that they are not just the same as something already in) but well established math symbols, in not a problem at all (except for time, which is spent mainly on the ISO side). Well, not quite. If it is not in the standard, then frustrated implementors and frustrated users will put characters *somewhere* and end up with many competing incompatible layouts... (Much like we have a dozen different \specials just for including EPS images). There many ongoing additions, in particular scripts not yet covered, historical scripts, and CJK ideographs. Of course, moving things around is a completely different issue, to be avoided at all cost. Agreed. Regards, Martin.

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

- 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):