On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 20:21:50 +0700, James Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2) Excellent typography.
Can you specify point 2?
Not entirely because I am not sufficiently familiar with the details of
rendering mathematics. I will try to learn something so I can contribute
more.
Here is what I can add:
* perfectly kerned x/y style fractions (often poorly simulated in HTML as
<sup>x</sup>/<sub>y</sub>)
* correct continuation of long fractions on the next line
* stacking of multiple over/underscripts
* stacking of multiple signs like tildes, arrows etc above variables
* stretching of tildes etc over complex expressions
* stretching of brackets and integrals around complex expressions
* matrices with cells of uniform size (as to accomodate for the largest
expression found)
* nice embedding of inline formulae in paragraphs of text (without
unnecessarily increasing line spacing)
So far people mentioned radicals and glyph shaping/kerning.
Another obvious issue is stretchy characters like integral signs and
brackets. Is the CSS model poerful enough to allow for this? If not, the
mosel needs to improve.
TeX doesn't scale glyphs. It selects glyphs of different sizes, and for
those that are larger than the larges glyphs available, it uses a pair of
glyphs for the ends and fills the space between them with the third glyph
(a line segment). But this approach is not possible in today's CSS, either.
--
Alexey Feldgendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
