Re: I don't understand this
Am 13.06.23 um 01:30 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck: On 6/12/23 16:08, Herbert Voss wrote: Am 12.06.23 um 21:49 schrieb Udicoudco: On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 8:32 PM Herbert Voss wrote: No, because unicode-math loads amsmath by default which defines \mathbb \mathbb isn't defined in amsmath, but in amsfonts, which should not be used with unicode-math (and as a consequence, neither amssymb should be used with unicode-math). sure ... If you _only_ load unicode-math the \mathbb is defined. So, Herbert, let me ask: Is there anything we can really do here to help the user? Or is this just how things are? I've gotten used to it, but it is a bit annoying. From TeX's view you can use any command for a special character. If that character is part of LyX's currently defined display font _and_ defined in the current TeX font are two other questions. And, from my point of view, totally user specific ... Herbert -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
On 6/12/23 16:08, Herbert Voss wrote: Am 12.06.23 um 21:49 schrieb Udicoudco: On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 8:32 PM Herbert Voss wrote: No, because unicode-math loads amsmath by default which defines \mathbb \mathbb isn't defined in amsmath, but in amsfonts, which should not be used with unicode-math (and as a consequence, neither amssymb should be used with unicode-math). sure ... If you _only_ load unicode-math the \mathbb is defined. So, Herbert, let me ask: Is there anything we can really do here to help the user? Or is this just how things are? I've gotten used to it, but it is a bit annoying. Riki -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
Am 12.06.23 um 21:49 schrieb Udicoudco: On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 8:32 PM Herbert Voss wrote: No, because unicode-math loads amsmath by default which defines \mathbb \mathbb isn't defined in amsmath, but in amsfonts, which should not be used with unicode-math (and as a consequence, neither amssymb should be used with unicode-math). sure ... If you _only_ load unicode-math the \mathbb is defined. Herbert -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 8:32 PM Herbert Voss wrote: > No, because unicode-math loads amsmath by default which defines \mathbb \mathbb isn't defined in amsmath, but in amsfonts, which should not be used with unicode-math (and as a consequence, neither amssymb should be used with unicode-math). > -- > lyx-users mailing list > lyx-users@lists.lyx.org > http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
Am 12.06.23 um 18:46 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
On 6/12/23 07:59, Herbert Voss wrote:
With unicode-math, "$\mathbb{0}$" should be rendered as "ퟘ" (U+1D7D8),
with unicode-math it should be $\Bbbzero$
Sounds like a bug, then.
No, because unicode-math loads amsmath by default which defines \mathbb
With \Bbbzero you can only be _really_ sure, that it will be taken from the
current math font.
Herbert
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
On 6/12/23 07:59, Herbert Voss wrote:
Am 12.06.23 um 13:47 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:28:50PM +0300, Udicoudco wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:04 AM Scott Kostyshak
wrote:
On 2023-06-10 21:49, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
It's because the 'blackboard' font is quite limited (to ASCII
caps, I
think). If you type characters not present in that font, you get
weird
results.
With modern math fonts (open type) the range of 'blackboard'
characters is wider,
and it includes small latin letters, and arabic numerals as well.
In this case, LyX creates the corresponding LaTeX code
"$\mathbb{0}$", which is valid LaTeX. It is true that the output is
counter-intuitive. I'm not convinced we should do anything here.
With unicode-math, "$\mathbb{0}$" should be rendered as "ퟘ" (U+1D7D8),
with unicode-math it should be $\Bbbzero$
Sounds like a bug, then.
Riki
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
Am 12.06.23 um 13:47 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:28:50PM +0300, Udicoudco wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:04 AM Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On 2023-06-10 21:49, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
It's because the 'blackboard' font is quite limited (to ASCII caps, I
think). If you type characters not present in that font, you get weird
results.
With modern math fonts (open type) the range of 'blackboard'
characters is wider,
and it includes small latin letters, and arabic numerals as well.
In this case, LyX creates the corresponding LaTeX code "$\mathbb{0}$", which is
valid LaTeX. It is true that the output is counter-intuitive. I'm not convinced we should
do anything here.
With unicode-math, "$\mathbb{0}$" should be rendered as "ퟘ" (U+1D7D8),
with unicode-math it should be $\Bbbzero$
Herbert
but it seems that LyX is not aware of that. Attached is an example.
Should I open
a ticket? I don't currently have access to my Linux machine, and can't
test it with master.
Interesting, that's good to know. I don't have Times New Roman on my system so
I can't test.
Scott
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 02:28:50PM +0300, Udicoudco wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:04 AM Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2023-06-10 21:49, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > It's because the 'blackboard' font is quite limited (to ASCII caps, I
> > > > think). If you type characters not present in that font, you get weird
> > > > results.
> > > >
>
> With modern math fonts (open type) the range of 'blackboard'
> characters is wider,
> and it includes small latin letters, and arabic numerals as well.
>
> > In this case, LyX creates the corresponding LaTeX code "$\mathbb{0}$",
> > which is valid LaTeX. It is true that the output is counter-intuitive. I'm
> > not convinced we should do anything here.
>
> With unicode-math, "$\mathbb{0}$" should be rendered as "ퟘ" (U+1D7D8),
> but it seems that LyX is not aware of that. Attached is an example.
> Should I open
> a ticket? I don't currently have access to my Linux machine, and can't
> test it with master.
Interesting, that's good to know. I don't have Times New Roman on my system so
I can't test.
Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
El lun, 12 jun 2023 a las 13:29, Udicoudco () escribió:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:04 AM Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2023-06-10 21:49, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > It's because the 'blackboard' font is quite limited (to ASCII caps, I
> > > > think). If you type characters not present in that font, you get
> weird
> > > > results.
> > > >
>
> With modern math fonts (open type) the range of 'blackboard'
> characters is wider,
> and it includes small latin letters, and arabic numerals as well.
>
> > In this case, LyX creates the corresponding LaTeX code "$\mathbb{0}$",
> which is valid LaTeX. It is true that the output is counter-intuitive. I'm
> not convinced we should do anything here.
>
> With unicode-math, "$\mathbb{0}$" should be rendered as "ퟘ" (U+1D7D8),
>
In PDF output, it does, but on LyX's UI it shows (I think) U+22ac: ⊬
LyX 2.4 dev build on openSUSE Leap 15.4 with Libertinus Serif as UI font.
Regards,
Ricardo
> but it seems that LyX is not aware of that. Attached is an example.
> Should I open
> a ticket? I don't currently have access to my Linux machine, and can't
> test it with master.
>
> Regards,
> Udi
>
> > --
> > lyx-users mailing list
> > lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> > http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
> --
> lyx-users mailing list
> lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
>
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:04 AM Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> >
> > On 2023-06-10 21:49, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> > >
> > > It's because the 'blackboard' font is quite limited (to ASCII caps, I
> > > think). If you type characters not present in that font, you get weird
> > > results.
> > >
With modern math fonts (open type) the range of 'blackboard'
characters is wider,
and it includes small latin letters, and arabic numerals as well.
> In this case, LyX creates the corresponding LaTeX code "$\mathbb{0}$", which
> is valid LaTeX. It is true that the output is counter-intuitive. I'm not
> convinced we should do anything here.
With unicode-math, "$\mathbb{0}$" should be rendered as "ퟘ" (U+1D7D8),
but it seems that LyX is not aware of that. Attached is an example.
Should I open
a ticket? I don't currently have access to my Linux machine, and can't
test it with master.
Regards,
Udi
> --
> lyx-users mailing list
> lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
newfile10.lyx
Description: application/lyx
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
Re: I don't understand this
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 07:28:18AM +0200, Daniel wrote:
>
> On 2023-06-10 21:49, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> > On 6/10/23 02:17, Daniel wrote:
> > > On 2023-06-10 05:54, Tom Goldring wrote:
> > > > If I put in the [\mathbb] "R" followed by _\aleph_0, the R and
> > > > the aleph show up correctly, but the zero (the subscript of the
> > > > aleph) shows up as a different character (I think it's the
> > > > character that's used in formal logic to mean something like "is
> > > > not a proof of").
> > >
> > > I do not know why it is showing different symbols.
> >
> > It's because the 'blackboard' font is quite limited (to ASCII caps, I
> > think). If you type characters not present in that font, you get weird
> > results.
> >
> > Riki
>
> I see. Would be better to get an undefined symbol, e.g. questions marks,
> rather than weird symbols. But I guess there is some technical reason for
> this.
>
> Daniel
In this case, LyX creates the corresponding LaTeX code "$\mathbb{0}$", which is
valid LaTeX. It is true that the output is counter-intuitive. I'm not convinced
we should do anything here.
We could try to do something to make it more clear that we're still in the
\mathbb inset, if the red corners aren't clear enough. I've been bitten by
these types of issues also. But I have no concrete suggestion.
We could provide a module called something like "Error on likely mistakes". I'm
guessing it would be easy to write LaTeX that gives an error if not certain
characters are used inside \mathbb. But the user would have to first manually
add that module, and I'm not sure the most people who would benefit from that
module would be the ones to add it.
Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
SOLVED: How to change citation in Biblatex spbasic
Thanks, Herbert and Jürgen. Good to know it is quite easy to get the desired change in the output. Wolfgang Am 11.06.23 um 10:14 schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller: Am Sonntag, dem 11.06.2023 um 09:02 +0200 schrieb Herbert Voss: Only for authors with the same familyname the given names are used. And this could be omitted by uniquename=false or maybe a less radical uniquename value (in Document > Settings > Bibliography > Cite Style > Options). See biblatex manual, 4.11.4 Name Disambiguation. -- lyx-users mailing list lyx-users@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
