- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:55:46 GMT
- To: matthias.mittelstein@sap.com
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
Matthias, > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-xml-entity-names-20091117/glyphs/022/U02220-020D2.png > seems to point to an existing file. Nevertheless it shows a placeholder only. > Ah thanks for that, The png works in firefox but not in IE. That's happened before occasionally, previously if I use imagemagic convert to convert the png (to anything and back again) it will warn of some internal inconsistency and fix it up.... $ convert U02220-020D2.png x.gif convert: Incorrect tRNS chunk length `U02220-020D2.png'. David Carlisle@dcarlisle /home/w3c/WWW/2003/entities/2007doc/glyphs/022 $ convert x.gif U02220-020D2.png David Carlisle@dcarlisle /home/w3c/WWW/2003/entities/2007doc/glyphs/022 $ cvs commit -m "bad chunk length" U02220-020D2.png Checking in U02220-020D2.png; /w3ccvs/WWW/2003/entities/2007doc/glyphs/022/U02220-020D2.png,v <-- U02220-020D2.png new revision: 1.2; previous revision: 1.1 done yes seems to work now, try the editor's draft at http://www.w3.org/2003/entities/2007doc/U020D2.html thanks. > I prefer hexadecimal Unicode code point numbers to have four or six > digits. May be that is old-fashioned and byte-oriented. But five digit > numbers hurt my eyes especially in columns with the title "BMP". original versions of these tables (in mathml, going back a decade or so) used the internal U01234 form pretty much everywhere: this form has advantages in the internal build as it's a valid XML ID (unlike U+ form which can't be used as an XML ID value, and consistently using 5 digits allows things to be sorted naively (until someone pushes some interesting characters in the 6 digit range;-) however in the visible text of the specification we've almost completely switched to using the Unicode U+1234 form, just using the original form for internal identifiers, and png file names, so I suppose it makes sense to catch the remaing cases as well. All the tables are generated so changing notation isn't a big deal just a matter of dropping in a suitable regular expression replace. I'll see what I can do. > What is the reason to show duplicates like " oplus, oplus, CirclePlus > ". well they are dupicated because (in the case of oplus) the name is both in xhtml-symbol and in isoamsb, but since I don't show the set name there the duplication is not very helpful, ..... I just checked in the stylesheet with distinct-values() xpath functin inserted and the editors' draft now just shows these just once: http://www.w3.org/2003/entities/2007doc/U020D2.html Thanks for your comments. David ________________________________________________________________________ The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom. This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. ________________________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 18 November 2009 21:56:39 UTC