# Re: More missing glyphs ...

• To: math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk
• Subject: Re: More missing glyphs ...
• From: haberg@matematik.su.se (Hans Aberg)
• Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 14:38:58 +0200

Matthias Clasen <mclasen@sun2.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de> writes:

>Oh, there is one pair of glyphs I forgot: If I remember correctly,
>Justin considered \lozenge and \diamond to be the same symbols. Is
>that really true, they look quite different to me (the one being square,
>while the other is horizontally squeezed).

The \diamond is listed as a binary operator, whereas the \lozenge is
listed as a miscellaneous symbol, so these have different intended use, and
the different design seems to reflect that.

One can also note the subtle differences between \lozenge and \diamondsuit.

-- Perhaps one should try to get a compiled list with the symbols intended,
or typical, use.

Hans Aberg