[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More missing glyphs...
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: More missing glyphs...
- From: email@example.com (Hans Aberg)
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 12:32:45 +0200
>>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
>At 11:53 97-04-21, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>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.
In fact, my hunch is that similar principles as in the development of
international documents will be involved in such a project.