W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > November 2013

Re: RTL directionality in LaTeX

From: Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 11:28:48 -0800
Message-ID: <CABqxo82Oibvuf==q3Yi+qx6pqoLrV52XfGUaschiEXj7dAwL_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>
Cc: Khaled Hosny <khaledhosny@eglug.org>, "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>, Azzeddine LAZREK <a_lazrek@yahoo.fr>
I'm wondering how many BIDI variants there are to consider. From
http://www.w3.org/TR/arabic-math/, I see 3-4 different styles of BIDI math.
These should be reflected in a TeX-like syntax, I think.

Are there other variants?
Peter.


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr> wrote:

> Le 05/11/2013 15:43, Khaled Hosny a écrit :
>
>
>  Since the direction of text and math are not always the same (many RTL
>> languages set math LTR), the command need to be explicitly for math.
>>
> Yes, that was one of the reason to make Gecko interpret CSS direction
> property the same way as MathML dir attribute (the other reason is that it
> simplifies the implementation). In an ideal world where MathML
> implementations are compatible with CSS, people could then just use
> something like
>
> math { direction: rtl; }
>
> or with CSS selectors
>
> div.MyArabicDiv math { direction: rtl; }
>
> to set the direction on all the math elements rather than having to
> explicitly attach a dir="rtl" attribute on each one.
>
>  But if it is just some pseudo-LaTeX syntax, I don’t think the actual
>> notation matters much, but \rtl{} looks more LaTeX-like to me.
>>
> Or perhaps \dir[rtl]{...} with an optional parameter so that someone can
> still switch back to LTR with \dir[ltr]{...}.
>
> --
> Frédéric Wang
> maths-informatique-jeux.com/blog/frederic
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2013 19:29:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 5 November 2013 19:29:17 UTC