W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > June 2009

mathvariant vs. plane 1

From: Bruce Miller <bruce.miller@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:44:16 -0400
Message-id: <4A437F30.3060909@nist.gov>
To: www-math@w3.org
I sure would like my Wronskians to be curly!
(ie. <mi mathvariant="script">W</mi> )
Alas, neither Firefox 3.0 nor Opera 10 support
mathvariant="script" (nor bold-script, fraktur,
bold-fraktur or double-struck). MathPlayer 2
does, however (congratulations! :>)

But it gets interesting: all three support
the Plane 1 sub-blocks for script, fraktur and
double-struck, given appropriate fonts!
(alas, still not bold-script, nor bold-fraktur).

Just to make it perverse, though, neither MathPlayer
nor Opera support most of the other plane 1 sub-blocks
(bold, bold-italic, sans-serif ...).

So, if we can't solely use mathvariant, nor
plane-1..... should we use a hybrid?
Ie. Plane-1 chars for script, fraktur & double-struck
and mathvariant for the others?
(and avoid bold-script, bold-fraktur)

Or are there any pending developments that
would improve the situation in some of the
browsers?

Thanks for your thoughts;
bruce
-- 
bruce.miller@nist.gov
http://math.nist.gov/~BMiller/
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 13:45:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 20 February 2010 06:13:05 GMT