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 f4L9wrf25390 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:53 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f4L9wq727154 . for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:52 +0200 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f4L9wq016479 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:52 +0200 (MET DST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0E1DC.A42F6C80" Received: from mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.57]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20586 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:51 +0200 (MEST) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f4L9wo016471 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:51 +0200 (MET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <8.9C4C7439@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:57:02 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 496349 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:46 +0200 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 LAA08721 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:45 +0200 (MET DST) 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 LAA93008 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:46 +0200 Received: from hromeo.algonet.se (hromeo.algonet.se [194.213.74.51]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f4L9wjj10948 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (qmail 4 invoked from network); 21 May 2001 11:58:41 +0200 Received: from garibaldi.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.103) by hromeo.algonet.se with SMTP; 21 May 2001 11:58:41 +0200 Received: from [195.100.226.144] (du144-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.144]) by garibaldi.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.2) with ESMTP id 411076.439119.990garibaldi-s0 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 11:58:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <15111.36254.279748.954703@hoelderlin.localdomain> <200105161742.MAA02503@riemann.math.twsu.edu> Return-Path: X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se x-mime-autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id LAA08722 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary 2.2 Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:54:59 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Hans Aberg" 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: 4095 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0E1DC.A42F6C80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 00:51 +0200 2001/05/21, Lars Hellstr=F6m wrote: >In what way does e.g. > > Euclid was a geometer. > >contain more logical mark-up than > > a \in A I think that the markup that is in TeX, like $\in$, is not viewed by mathematicians as logical markup, but merely a way to provide the glyphs and a name that is easy to remember. The tie to "set membership" or whatever mathematical quantity is weak, and if a mathematician would = prefer another glyphs than what TeX or LaTeX suggest, one would use that one instead. In fact, when the AMS-fonts were developed, one added some new glyphs in order to cover up for this practise: One can note that there is a \varnothing as an alternative to the TeX \emptyset, and two variations \hbar, \hslash, as two variations for the Heisenberg constant. I would prefer \varnothing to denote the empty set; and if I use that, = it looks to me as though as \emptyset could be used to denote something = else. As for the \hbar and \hslash, if it is a paper in physics, I would = probably avoid using them both side by side, because I think that a physicist = might confuse them. But a mathematician may not have the same problem. So the best one could hope for, I think, is to build a layer above those glyphs, say an empty set command that can expand to \emptyset or \varnothing, a set membership command that can expand to either of \in = or the two epsilon variations, but there can be no restrictions on the = glyphs themselves in the sense that the use of one of them prohibits the other. Hans Aberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0E1DC.A42F6C80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary 2.2

At 00:51 +0200 2001/05/21, Lars Hellstr=F6m = wrote:
>In what way does e.g.
>
>   Euclid was a geometer.
>
>contain more logical mark-up than
>
>   a \in A

I think that the markup that is in TeX, like $\in$, is = not viewed by
mathematicians as logical markup, but merely a way to = provide the glyphs
and a name that is easy to remember. The tie to = "set membership" or
whatever mathematical quantity is weak, and if a = mathematician would prefer
another glyphs than what TeX or LaTeX suggest, one = would use that one
instead.

In fact, when the AMS-fonts were developed, one added = some new glyphs in
order to cover up for this practise: One can note = that there is a
\varnothing as an alternative to the TeX \emptyset, = and two variations
\hbar, \hslash, as two variations for the Heisenberg = constant.

I would prefer \varnothing to denote the empty set; = and if I use that, it
looks to me as though as \emptyset could be used to = denote something else.
As for the \hbar and \hslash, if it is a paper in = physics, I would probably
avoid using them both side by side, because I think = that a physicist might
confuse them. But a mathematician may not have the = same problem.

So the best one could hope for, I think, is to build a = layer above those
glyphs, say an empty set command that can expand to = \emptyset or
\varnothing, a set membership command that can expand = to either of \in or
the two epsilon variations, but there can be no = restrictions on the glyphs
themselves in the sense that the use of one of them = prohibits the other.

  Hans Aberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0E1DC.A42F6C80--