On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Kirill Smelkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 11:30:17PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I was looking more at how the unicode printing could be leveraged even >> more than what we are currently doing. I found some pretty neat >> examples, for example: >> >> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ucs/examples/UTF-8-demo.txt >> >> This is best viewed in vim (for example) in the terminal. Then I tried >> to encode some common formulas, that I need, for example: >> >> In [19]: print u"\u00BD\u2202\u1D66\u03C6\u2202\u1D5D\u03C6" >> ½∂ᵦφ∂ᵝφ >> >> That looks pretty good. However, if I wanted to change \beta to \mu, I >> didn't find a way to do it, as I didn't find a subscript \mu in >> unicode. See here what is available and what not: >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superscript#Unicode >> >> I don't understand, why the full superscript latin lowercase alphabet >> is available except q... And why only 8 latin letters are available as >> subscripts. >> Otherwise there seem to be characters for pretty much everything I >> need in 95% of cases. I just looked at my recent notes in TeX that I >> put here: >> >> http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=884#c21 >> >> and I think all the formulas could be drawn by the current SymPy >> prettyprinter if we could fix the above missing characters in >> sub/superscripts. Does anyone know how to do it? Kirill? >> >> If unicode is truly missing them, I think it will be worthy to add >> them somehow, e.g. propose some unicode positions for them, and create >> an example font, that can be used in a terminal. I think it doesn't >> have to be particularly hard, it's probably just that noone has needed >> the characters so far. That would greatly increase the usability of >> our pretty printer. Then I could manipulate almost all expressions I >> need in ipython and having them print nicely in a terminal. I like >> terminals, I don't think anyone has invented anything better in the >> last 30 years. :) > > :) > > I completely agree. > > It seems not all needed character/glyphs have their entries in unicode, > so we should push unicode.org (which we do) to include them. > > As to fonts - I think it shouldn't be difficult to get super or > subscript character with fontforge basing on its normal glyph. > > Let's push unicode.org all together: > > http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2008-m06/0062.html
Yes, I got quite some responses, as you can read there and here is my reply to that: http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2008-m06/0103.html and Kirill's comments here: http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2008-m06/0124.html There were no more objections (but maybe some will still come), so I sent another email. It takes it a long time to appear in the archives, so I am quoting the most important part here: ------------ I think we need to follow the rules here: http://www.unicode.org/pending/proposals.html Especially read the "Interim Solutions". After readingt it, I think what we should do is that we'll start with adding the characters in the Private Use Area and make sure that our application SymPy (e.g. Python) can show them just fine in the terminal. After we have this, we'll have the exact idea what stuff needs to be fixed/patched and we can propose adding them officially into some non Private Use Area of unicode. ------------ Ondrej --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
