- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 09:52:03 GMT
- To: mikeday@yeslogic.com
- Cc: lpadovan@cs.unibo.it, www-math@w3.org
Thanks, I never would have found that one! I tried to highlight it as much as possible:-) See the yellow blob in : http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/italic.html which is linked from chapter 6 of the spec. I find that an interesting justification for the lack of an assignment for "MATHEMATICAL ITALIC SMALL H", as wouldn't this character actually have different semantics to "PLANCK CONSTANT"? The Math WG argued that the existing BMP characters should be defined to have "specific" semantics, and the new ones should be defined to be generic alphabetic runs. If Unicode really is a semantic character set rather than a glyph collection this would seem reasonable. But the UTC decided against this. In this case (planck) they may well have agreed, but in others such as double struck C 2102 DOUBLE-STRUCK CAPITAL C they probably had (a bit) more reason to refuse to classify this as "the complex numbers" and allow 1D39A as a generic double strck C. David -- http://www.dcarlisle.demon.co.uk/matthew ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________
Received on Monday, 2 February 2004 04:53:38 UTC