W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > August 2003

RE: Accented variables (names)

From: <jpederse@wiley.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:03:36 -0400
To: "Pepping, Simon (ELS)" <S.Pepping@elsevier.nl>
Cc: "'Robert Miner'" <RobertM@dessci.com>, www-math@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF1F566AEA.A76A9B9A-ON85256D7A.003CBFEF@wiley.com>

Simon Pepping writes:
> We at Elsevier would indeed like to create a set of conventions, so
> that we do not get every possible variation in our files.
> The end of the operator dictionary gives a good start:
> &Breve;, &Cedilla;, &DiacriticalGrave;, &DiacriticalDot;,
> &DiacriticalDoubleAcute;, &LeftArrow;, &LeftRightArrow;,
> &LeftVector;, &DiacriticalAcute;, &RightArrow;, &RightVector;,
> &DiacriticalTilde;, &DoubleDot;, &DownBreve;, &Hacek;, &Hat;, &OverBar;,
> &OverBrace;, &OverBracket;, &OverParenthesis;, &TripleDot;, &UnderBar;,
> &UnderBrace;, &UnderBracket;, &UnderParenthesis;
> I have added to them &ring; as a possible accent.

It would indeed be good to have some conventions. At Wiley we will likely
stay with the combining diacritical marks for single characters not in
MathML in inline expressions (and use names we have provided to vendors for
them -- see http://v.wiley.com:3535/dtds/wileyml/dtd/wileycdm.ent.txt
user/pass = wileyguest/wileyguest -- anyone is welcome to use those names).
But if the combining marks are not the thing to use within MathML, then
your suggested list does look like a good start. A few suggestions:

1. Perhaps UnderBar should be eliminated, as it is a combining mark
(&#x00332;) and with other accents in the list there are no under/over
pairs. OverBar by itself should do the trick, although I admit it sounds a
bit funny using that name within <munder>.

2. OverBar is actually defined to be the same codepoint as macr
(&#x000AF;). This symbol applied to a single character does not necessarily
stretch the full width of the letter (compare &#x00304; and &#x00305;). If
there were ever a case where there was a need to draw a distinction between
the shorter line (macron) and a complete overline (&#x00305;) on single
characters, which I can imagine some finicky authors wanting, there would
not be a name for
the latter.

3. Of the others, DownBreve (&x00311;)  and TripleDot (&x020DB;) are also
combining marks, so presumably we should not or cannot use them by
themselves in <mo>&....;</mo> but should put a space before them.

4. We may also want DotDot (four dots above &#x020DC;) and a double line
(&#x0033F;) although those are also combining.

If we go with Robert's suggestion on <menclose> for strikethroughs, we'd
need some names for the notations. We could use existing names like sol,
bsol, mdash, but Robert's suggestion of names like NESWslash is probably
clearer. In any case, we'd be interested in those three strikethroughs (not
sure of a good long name for a straight horizontal strikethrough).

Lastly, there would be two true enclosures for which we've found need: a
box/rectangle surrounding something (can be simulated with mtable) and a
surrounding circle, although only applied to a single character, and so far
covered by the Unicode enclosed alphanumerics block (U+02460 - 24FF). I
suppose "box" and "circle" would be fine names for notations for those.


John Pedersen
Content Systems,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2003 11:02:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:34 UTC