Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f19K2LH05637 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:22 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f19K2Ld19007 . for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C092D3.36B59B00" Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19K2LM06633 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA01884 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:20 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19K2KM06626 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <9.0A9982E4@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:14 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 489118 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:16 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA27166 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA43066 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:16 +0100 Received: from plmsc.psu.edu (raman.plmsc.psu.edu [128.118.156.124]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19K2Fu12489 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:02:16 +0100 (MET) Received: (from boris@localhost) by plmsc.psu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA02177; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:51:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200102091643.RAA23818@mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr> (message from Thierry Bouche on Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:43:56 +0100) Return-Path: Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: inputenc text (and/or math) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:51:13 +0100 Message-ID: <200102091951.OAA02177@plmsc.psu.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Boris Veytsman" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3784 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092D3.36B59B00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:43:56 +0100 > From: Thierry Bouche > > Nope. The really old tradition did know nothing about lining (also > called "english" in France ;-) digits, anything used old style, which > you still can see in the scan of a rather recent book by H.=A0Cartan > I posted somewhere in page of the Latex navigator. Yes. I remember an old book of log tables, that used exclusively old style digits. It was difficult to use, at least for me. > > There have been modern attempts to do what you're refering to. (I had > a vote about the 3 possible styles, but I cannot make statistics about > the voter's taste, as they were so few -- you can have a look at > = http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~bouche/tex/mathtests/OS-ornot-OS-e.ht= ml > if you have some spare time to loose...) Count me under half/half > > I think that you're point is one point in a myriad of > possibilities. If you replace `must' by `could' in your discussion, I > heartily agree with you, but notice that what you describe is easily > done with current latex (redefine most \the, \MakeUpperLower-case, > etc.) Exactly. I think that this style, while not the only style for math typesetting, is logical and aestetically pleasing -- and easy to implement. In fact, I might implement it myself if I have some free time. -- Good luck -Boris http://www.plmsc.psu.edu/~boris/ ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092D3.36B59B00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: inputenc text (and/or math)

> = Date:         Fri, 9 Feb 2001 = 17:43:56 +0100
> From: Thierry Bouche = <Thierry.Bouche@UJF-GRENOBLE.FR>

>
> Nope. The really old tradition did know nothing = about lining (also
> called "english" in France ;-) digits, = anything used old style, which
> you still can see in the scan of a rather recent = book by H.=A0Cartan
> I posted somewhere in page of the Latex = navigator.

Yes. I remember an old book of log tables, that used = exclusively old
style digits. It was difficult to use, at least for = me.


>
> There have been modern attempts to do what = you're refering to. (I had
> a vote about the 3 possible styles, but I cannot = make statistics about
> the voter's taste, as they were so few -- you = can have a look at
> http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~bouche/tex/mathtests/OS-o= rnot-OS-e.html
> if you have some spare time to loose...)

Count me under half/half

>
> I think that you're point is one point in a = myriad of
> possibilities. If you replace `must' by `could' = in your discussion, I
> heartily agree with you, but notice that what = you describe is easily
> done with current latex (redefine most \the, = \MakeUpperLower-case,
> etc.)

Exactly. I think that this style, while not the only = style for math
typesetting, is logical and aestetically pleasing -- = and easy to
implement. In fact, I might implement it myself if I = have some free
time.

--
Good luck

-Boris
http://www.plmsc.psu.edu/~boris= /

------_=_NextPart_001_01C092D3.36B59B00--