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

**To**:*math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk***Subject**:**Re: More missing glyphs...****From**:*Matthias Clasen <mclasen@sun2.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de>***Date**: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 11:53:07 +0200 (MET DST)

On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, Frank Mittelbach wrote: [...] > it is probably true that some mathematicians put their hands on any > symbol they could reach from within TeX to get more symbols available Yes, that is true. Additionally each branch seems to develop some new symbols. I could easily come up with 5-10 symbols from mathematical logic which have not been mentioned in Justin Zieglers work. Perhaps it would be a good idea to classify possible math glyphs wrt the branches in which they are used. Then one could include in a standard setup only those glyphs which are more widely used and create some add-on packages specifically designed for the need of single branches (e.g. an encoding for mathematical logic, an encoding for physics, etc). This would also go in the direction indicated earlier by Frank Mittelbach, i.e. taking things out of the standard setup. Regards, Matthias

**References**:**Re: More missing glyphs...***From:*Frank Mittelbach <Frank.Mittelbach@Uni-Mainz.DE>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: More missing glyphs...** - Next by Date:
**Re: More missing glyphs...** - Prev by thread:
**Re: More missing glyphs...** - Next by thread:
**Re: More missing glyphs...** - Index(es):