isn't it specified in TeX using a font selection package instead of the default one? Also the only upright letters I saw was for inserting normal text (not mathematical symbols) or comments/descriptions, or when using the standardized "monospace", or "serif" font (which are not italic by default).
2016-05-16 0:25 GMT+02:00 Hans Åberg <[email protected]>: > > > On 16 May 2016, at 00:05, Murray Sargent <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hans Åberg mentioned "Changing Basic Latin and Greek to upright does not > seem practical, due to legacy and lack of efficient input methods." > > > > Have to say that it's really easy for the user to switch between math > upright, italic, bold, and bold italic letters in Microsoft Word by just > using the usual hot keys as discussed in > > > > > https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/murrays/2007/05/30/using-math-italic-and-bold-in-word-2007/ > . > > > > This capability has been shipping for over 10 years now. But admittedly > implementing such input functionality is a little tricky since the > alphanumerics need to be converted to the desired Unicode Math > Alphanumerics. > > I am not familiar with the product, so it unclear to me whether it it > produces a UTF-8 text file with the correct Unicode code points, as is a > requirement for the LuaTeX engine that ConTeXt defaults to. One can design > a new key map on OS X that selects the correct Unicode code points, but > that is a huge task, given the large number of math symbols. > > The legacy issue is that there are already loads of TeX code that > translates the Basic Latin into Unicode math italic style. So it is hard to > break the habit, and old code cannot readily be reused. > > And one can ignore the problem altogether, and use the traditional TeX > backslash “\…” commands, but using Unicode helps the readability of the > source code. This is even more so in the case of theorem proof assistants. > > >
