Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([62.225.9.49]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:02:04 +0100 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h0KG216C000361 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 17:02:03 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h0KFjAZr019760; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:45:10 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2C09D.4633E600" Received: from listserv (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h0K3Js1D000694; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:38:05 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 7261 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:38:05 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h0KFc55f007710 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:38:05 +0100 Received: from smtp.wanadoo.es ([62.37.236.142]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h0KFj7Zr019725 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:45:07 +0100 (MET) Received: from Ordenador-de-Javier-Bezos.local. (62-37-82-133.dialup.uni2.es [62.37.82.133]) by smtp.wanadoo.es (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h0KMcIh31485 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:38:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <15913.39574.802333.589429@istrati.mittelbach-online.de> References: <15913.39574.802333.589429@istrati.mittelbach-online.de> Return-Path: X-Mailer: GyazMail version 0.9.3 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jan 2003 16:02:04.0816 (UTC) FILETIME=[46B06900:01C2C09D] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) X-Spam-Score: -1.3 () IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_02_03 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: LICR objects in math Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:41:01 +0100 Message-ID: A<20030120164101895106.GyazMail.jbezos@wanadoo.es> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: LICR objects in math Thread-Index: AcLAnUbKBIkAfFt/RtCg2YaIJwMHHw== From: "Javier Bezos" To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4448 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C09D.4633E600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Frank, > LICR objects are also known as "font encoding specific commands", ie = stuff > that is declared by the font encoding files, eg > > \" \ss \texteuro ... > > since 1996 or so when inputenc was first introduced it was an open = question > whether input chars mapped by inputenc should be "text", "math", = "text+math" Given the mathematical origins of TeX I think that some kind of math LICR should be included. While it's true that a few years ago most of fonts contained just a few math symbols, currently with the advent of Unicode things are changed dramatically, and the combination of true symbols (instead of macros like \alpha or \nabla), perhaps combined with a package like nath, can make formulas much clearer. I would separate math and text, but it happens that Unicode does not, iiar, so it seems that the only possibility seems that you have written. Definitely, kerning must not be killed. > should such an implementation be incorporated (somehow not this one), > - as a package, > - as a standard, > - not at all ... I would vote for a package (making it standard in LaTeX3 if necessary). Javier ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C09D.4633E600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: LICR objects in math

Frank,

> LICR objects are also known as "font = encoding specific commands", ie stuff
> that is declared by the font encoding files, = eg
>
>  \"  \ss \texteuro ...
>
> since 1996 or so when inputenc was first = introduced it was an open question
> whether input chars mapped by inputenc should be = "text", "math", "text+math"

Given the mathematical origins of TeX I think that = some kind of
math LICR should be included. While it's true that a = few years ago
most of fonts contained just a few math symbols, = currently with
the advent of Unicode things are changed = dramatically, and the
combination of true symbols (instead of macros like = \alpha or
\nabla), perhaps combined with a package like nath, = can make
formulas much clearer.

I would separate math and text, but it happens that = Unicode
does not, iiar, so it seems that the only possibility = seems
that you have written. Definitely, kerning must not = be killed.

>  should such an implementation be = incorporated (somehow not this one),
>     - as a package,
>     - as a standard,
>     - not at all ...

I would vote for a package (making it standard in = LaTeX3 if
necessary).

Javier

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C09D.4633E600--