The TeX collection includes things which are not only mathematical symbols. No need to be so dismissive, Asmus.
On 13 Jul 2012, at 14:24, Asmus Freytag wrote: > On 7/13/2012 1:57 AM, Michael Everson wrote: >> That document is 164 pages long. I would be interested in examining it after >> someone else has done the background work of a first pass at identifying >> which characters are already encoded. This is sort of an >> emoji/wingdings/webdings scenario, I guess. Michael Everson * >> http://www.evertype.com/ > > The process of encoding mathematical characters has used experts from a > coalition of publishers to help make the differentiation between "ad-hoc" and > "conventional" symbols. Only if there's a convention around the use of a > symbol does it deserve encoding. If there's been a budding convention around > some symbol (republication across other works) that was missed by this > process, it would be nice to get access to this information from participants. > > A./ > > PS: earlier versions of this document have been consulted in the process of > completing the math repertoire Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
