- From: Bruce Miller <bruce.miller@nist.gov>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:31:05 -0400
- To: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
Paul Libbrecht wrote: > There was a discussion about this topic a bit in April on the > tex@lists.river-valley.com mailing list. > Can't reach the archive. > > It would be my naive interpretation that browsers should do the exact > same thing if either you successfully use the plane-1 character or the > character with the variant. > Unfortunately, it looks like the specification could not be fully > detailed about that because plane-1 doesn't have all (fortunately?): > http://www.w3.org/Math/Group/draft-spec/chapter7.html#chars.BMP-SMP > so it just says it "should" be equivalent. Yes, that's a side issue about using Plane 1: the Unicode folks didn't want to define a 2nd codepoint for glyphs that, for whatever reason, were already defined at other places. For example, a number of double-struck letters were already defined for Complex, Numbers, Integers, etc. Understandable, I suppose, but it certainly creates headaches! So, for something like LaTeXML, I would have to map some combinations of mathvariant + letter to plane-1, but other random combinations to places in plane-0 blocks. For search indexing, you'd likely need to do the reverse, since people will expect a W to match a W in any mathvariant or plane-1 block. > paul > > > Le 25-juin-09 à 15:44, Bruce Miller a écrit : > >> 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? > -- bruce.miller@nist.gov http://math.nist.gov/~BMiller/
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 16:31:52 UTC