[ Please don't copy me on replies; the place for this is the mailing
list, not my inbox, unless you want to go off-list. ]
On 2012-07-11, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
Unicode has added all the characters from TeX plus some, making it
possible to use characters in the input file where
| As for editors: If your own editor have no problems with the BOM, then
| what? But I think Notepad can also save as UTF-8 but without the BOM -
| there should be possible to get an option for choosing when you save
| it.
|
|Perhaps there should be such an option in Notepad, but there
Steven Atreju, Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:32:46 +0200:
In the meanwhile the UTF-8 BOM is in the standard and thus
contradicts fourty years of (well) good (Unix/POSIX) engineering
and craftsmanship. Where a file is a file and everything is a
file, holistically. Where small tools which do their
On 12 Jul 2012, at 10:44, Julian Bradfield wrote:
[ Please don't copy me on replies; the place for this is the mailing
list, not my inbox, unless you want to go off-list. ]
Check if you can set the mailing list preferences. On some lists, it is very
important to cc, as those that post to the
[ Please don't copy me on replies; the place for this is the mailing
list, not my inbox, unless you want to go off-list. ]
Hitting “reply to all” on your mail places you in the To field, and
the list in Cc. At least in Gmail.
Á
On 12 Jul 2012, at 12:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
In practice, no working mathematician is going to use the mathematical
alphanumerical symbols to write maths in (La)TeX, because it's
fantastically inconvenient compared to the usual way (supplementary
plane support is far from universal, and
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Leif Halvard Silli
xn--mlform-...@xn--mlform-iua.no wrote:
I guess you get the same problem with UTF-16 files also, then?
UTF-16 isn't a text file in the Unix world; it's a binary file. UTF-8
is the only standard Unicode encoding that acts like text to a Unix
On 2012-07-12, Steven Atreju snatr...@googlemail.com wrote:
In the future simple things like '$ cat File1 File2 File3' will
no longer work that easily. Currently this works *whatever* file,
and even program code that has been written more than thirty years
ago will work correctly. No! You
Leif Halvard Silli xn--mlform-...@xn--mlform-iua.no wrote:
|Steven Atreju, Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:32:46 +0200:
|
| In the meanwhile the UTF-8 BOM is in the standard and thus
| contradicts fourty years of (well) good (Unix/POSIX) engineering
| and craftsmanship. Where a file is a file and
2012-07-12 13:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-11, Eric Muller emul...@adobe.com wrote:
[…]
When it's plain text, Unicode has the burden of solving all the
problems. When it's a richer system, there is the issue of cooperation
between the layers, a situation that Unicode cannot ignore.
Naena Guru, Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:40:19 -0500:
As I said, I use HTML-Kit (and Tools).
Your problem appears to be that HTML-Kit does not directly support
UTF-8. But are you aware that you can still work with UTF-8 with it?
You only need to use UnicodePad in the Unicode menu of the Tools menu,
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
There are many characters that TeX users use that are not in
Unicode.
All standard characters from TeX, LaTeX, and AMSTeX should be there,
What's a standard character? There's no such thing.
To take a random entry from the LaTeX Symbol
Right. Unix was unique when it was created as it was built to handle
all files as unstructured binary files. The history os a lot
different, and text files have always used another paradigm, based n
line records. End of lines initially were not really control
characters. And even today the
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 12:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
In practice, no working mathematician is going to use the mathematical
alphanumerical symbols to write maths in (La)TeX, because it's
..
the Unicode mathematical symbol model does not match
2012/7/12 Steven Atreju snatr...@googlemail.com:
UTF-8 is a bytestream, not multioctet(/multisequence).
Not even. UTF-8 is a text-stream, not made of arbitrary sequences of
bytes. It has a lot of internal semantics and constraints. Some things
are very meaningful, some play absolutely no role at
Doug Ewell, Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:12:46 -0600:
and people who want to create or modify UTF-8 files which will
be consumed by a process that is intolerant of the signature
should not use Notepad. That goes for HTML (pre-5) pages [snip]
HTML5-parsers MUST support UTF-8. They do not need to
On 12 Jul 2012, at 15:54, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
There are many characters that TeX users use that are not in
Unicode.
All standard characters from TeX, LaTeX, and AMSTeX should be there,
What's a standard character? There's no such
On 7/10/2012 5:35 PM, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
The main point is that asserting a general preference in an annotation
for ∶ to express a ratio, as Asmus had in his formulation, is simply
wrong and counterproductive. (We are not going to change the world's
usage from : to ∶ by fiat; and and the
On 12 Jul 2012, at 16:06, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 12:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
In practice, no working mathematician is going to use the mathematical
alphanumerical symbols to write maths in (La)TeX, because it's
..
Title: HTML clipboard
Here's my *updated* summary of the annotations that we've been
discussing so far:
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 :
RATIO is preferred in mathematical use
U+00B7 MIDDLE DOT
2012-07-12 19:31, Asmus Freytag wrote:
I don't see any problem in amending the proposed annotations
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 : RATIO is
preferred in mathematical use
U+2236 RATIO
* Used in preference to 003A : to denote division or scale in
On 12 Jul 2012, at 19:24, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-07-12 19:31, Asmus Freytag wrote:
I don't see any problem in amending the proposed annotations
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 : RATIO is
preferred in mathematical use
U+2236 RATIO
* Used
2012-07-12 20:23, Asmus Freytag wrote:
U+00B7 MIDDLE DOT
* also used as raised decimal point or to denote multiplication, for the
latter usage 22C5 · DOT OPERATOR is preferred
Is there evidence of actual use of MIDDLE DOT as decimal point? I mean
the use of the Unicode character, rather than
On 7/12/2012 10:24 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-07-12 19:31, Asmus Freytag wrote:
I don't see any problem in amending the proposed annotations
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 : RATIO is
preferred in mathematical use
U+2236 RATIO
* Used in
On 12 Jul 2012, at 19:02, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
Is there evidence of actual use of MIDDLE DOT as decimal point? I mean the
use of the Unicode character, rather than PERIOD raised using higher-level
protocols.
I have evidence of a very high dot used as a thousands separator. I am not sure
2012/7/12 Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 19:02, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
Is there evidence of actual use of MIDDLE DOT as decimal point? I mean the
use of the Unicode character, rather than PERIOD raised using higher-level
protocols.
I have evidence of a very high
2012-07-12 21:07, Asmus Freytag wrote:
What the examples show from TeX is that colon and ratio cannot be
substituted for each other without affecting the display.
This looks like a problem in TeX rather than character standards. If TeX
can space $a+b$ properly, what’s the issue with $a:b$?
On 12 Jul 2012, at 21:03, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-07-12 21:07, Asmus Freytag wrote:
What the examples show from TeX is that colon and ratio cannot be
substituted for each other without affecting the display.
This looks like a problem in TeX rather than character standards. If TeX can
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 07:08:44 +0530
Shriramana Sharma samj...@gmail.com wrote:
Looking at the two sets of Brahmi numbers would also be instructive...
There's nothing unexpected there. BRAHMI DIGIT ZERO...NINE have numeric
type decimal, probably as the ancestral members of the
general category
Hans wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 15:54, Julian Bradfield wrote:
..
Not to mention the symbols I've used from time to time, because
You tell me, because I posted a request for missing characters in different
forums. Perhaps you invented it after the standardization was made?
Why on earth would I
On 12 Jul 2012, at 22:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
But wanting to do so would be crazy. My mu-nu ligature is, as far as I know,
used only by me (and co-authors who let me do the typesetting), and so if
Unicode has any sanity left, it would not encode it.
Is it in print?
My colleagues in
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 16:06, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 12:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
In practice, no working mathematician is going to use the mathematical
alphanumerical
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
[If yo do not send an email directly to me, I may overlook seeing it, due to my
filtering system.]
Hans wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 15:54, Julian Bradfield wrote:
..
Not to mention the symbols I've used from time to time, because
You tell
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:47, Michael Everson wrote:
...
Is it in print?
...
If so, then it should be encoded.
There is a document The Comprehensive LaTeX Symbol List with a lot symbols.
In my installation from TeX Live http://www.tug.org/texlive/, it is in:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:27, Hans Aberg wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:47, Michael Everson wrote:
...
Is it in print?
...
If so, then it should be encoded.
There is a document The Comprehensive LaTeX Symbol List with a lot symbols.
In my installation from TeX Live
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:27, Hans Aberg wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:47, Michael Everson wrote:
...
Is it in print?
...
If so, then it should be encoded.
There is a document The Comprehensive LaTeX Symbol List with a lot symbols.
In my installation from TeX Live
On 13 Jul 2012, at 00:10, Julian Bradfield wrote:
Latest version requires STIXFonts to be installed. Some other proof
assistants use it.
However, that's not true. Isabelle does not need to use Unicode; it
runs happily in an ASCII terminal, because its internal representation
is tokens,
On 12 Jul 2012, at 19:23, Asmus Freytag wrote:
Here's my *updated* summary of the annotations that we've been discussing so
far:
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 : RATIO is
preferred in mathematical use
Perhaps the mathematical styles that exists
1. Michael Everson wrote:
Still it might be interesting to see the symbols-a4.pdf.
I have always wanted to see an associative array for The Comprehensive
LaTeX Symbol List mapping symbols to sets of use cases, considering
only standardized usage and perhaps only the literature that would be
On 7/12/2012 2:47 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 22:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
But wanting to do so would be crazy. My mu-nu ligature is, as far as I know,
used only by me (and co-authors who let me do the typesetting), and so if
Unicode has any sanity left, it would not
On 7/12/2012 3:10 PM, Julian Bradfield wrote:
If you read any introduction to TeX, it will explain how you use
macros to provide a structured markup. If you were using that
notation, then you would define a suitable macro, say
\def\tetration#1#2{{}^{#2}{#1}} and write $\tetration{y}{x}$. This
On 7/12/2012 2:47 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 22:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
But wanting to do so would be crazy. My mu-nu ligature is, as far as I know,
used only by me (and co-authors who let me do the typesetting), and so if
Unicode has any sanity left, it would not
42 matches
Mail list logo
