W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Update to unicode.xml

From: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 17:22:16 +0200
Message-ID: <53B423A8.7050501@free.fr>
To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>
CC: Christian Lerch <christian.p.lerch@gmail.com>
Le 22/06/2014 19:31, David Carlisle a écrit :
> If you don't follow updates to the unicode.xml file used as the source 
> for entity definitions in mathml and html
> skip this message:-)
> Christian's recent  questions about unicode.xml (and some recent bug 
> reports about unicode-math latex package)
> prompted me to look again at the tex mappings in unicode.xml.
> The existing ones were mostly speculative assignments dating from the 
> 1990's some years before the bulk of
> math characters  were added to Unicode.
> I have extended the schema to allow multiple <latex> and <mathlatex> 
> elements so the file can track different mappings,
> and added a set attribute do distinguish these. So that now for 
> example there are entries such as
>          <mathlatex set="unicode-math">\rightarrow</mathlatex>
> for U+"2192" .
> This  mathlatex set="unicode-math" set is mechanically extracted from 
> the source of the unicode-math package
> (the principle method for using unicode math fonts with xelatex and 
> lualatex)
> https://github.com/wspr/unicode-math/blob/master/unicode-math-table.tex
> So, while I'm not sure I like all the mappings here they correspond to 
> running TeX code which is a definite improvement
> over the previous ones.
> Frédéric Wang reported some problems with the TeX mappings a while 
> back I haven't fixed those yet, I may just remove them
> in favour of this new set, or perhaps this set and a set derived from 
> a package for classic TeX  (amssymb or stix-latex)
> comments welcome on the best plan of action here....
As I recall, the last time I checked unicode.xml, there were several 
sets with different mappings (AMS, IIEE etc) and some of them clearly 
had mistakes, so that was a bit messy. Personally, I don't mind dropping 
the old TeX mappings as long as a clear list of TeX mapping for math 
char commands is provided, on which one can rely on.

Frédéric Wang
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 15:22:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:47 UTC