From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>

Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:15:45 +0200

Message-ID: <442C3C71.3060002@activemath.org>

To: Neil Soiffer <neils@dessci.com>

Cc: Public MathML mailing list <www-math@w3.org>

Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:15:45 +0200

Message-ID: <442C3C71.3060002@activemath.org>

To: Neil Soiffer <neils@dessci.com>

Cc: Public MathML mailing list <www-math@w3.org>

Neil Soiffer wrote: > > I assume that by the dual operator "*", you mean "*" in a superscript > position such as in x^*. In such a position, it has no arguments and > precedence is meaningless so I don't understand what you are > asking/commenting on. > Well... we're getting down to where it shouldn't get... the appearance of character. The * symbol in all the fonts I used every day is high so I'd write V* without an exponent. Would such a shape be part of Unicode spec ? > > Maybe this exposes just how weak my K-12 education was :-) > ;-) > > FYI: (as you know) "*" is not usually used for multiplication in > typeset math -- · or × or ⁢ are typically used. > "*" was included for compatibility with ASCII-based math notations > just as ">=" was included. The operator dictionary does not recommend > one form over another and tried to be inclusive as an aid to > developers in case those notations were used by authors. > Another usage of * which is not a multiplication but a binary operator is the pull-back (much used in categories, topology, and differential geometry, I agree we leave K-12 here ;-)) or the convolution (which at least many electrical engineers use). Do these all have the same precedence ? Not sure. I fear Darwinism should suppresses species! paulReceived on Thursday, 30 March 2006 20:15:57 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:37 UTC
*