El dic 20, 2010, a las 8:52 p.m., Dominik Wujastyk escribió: > I fail to understand your point. Pre-modern mathematics from South Asia is > almost all written in Sanskrit.
But not written in modern algebraic/arithmetic/set-theoretic notation; it contains Sanskrit equivalents of statements like "the square on the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares on the other two sides." > If you edit and publish one of these works - as many do - you need the math > capabilities of TeX. Hayashi's edition of the Bakhshali MS contains both an > edition of the Sanskrit text from the codex unicus and a translation of it > into English. Both parts of Hayashi's work used TeX's math capabilities > extensively. Most editions are like this. These would count as contemporary translations of Sanskrit works, or presentations of math from Sanskrit works, which I already mentioned. Regards, Shrisha Rao > D > > On 20 December 2010 15:43, Shrisha Rao <[email protected]> wrote: > El dic 20, 2010, a las 8:02 p.m., Dominik Wujastyk escribió: > > > Actually, the famous edition of the Sanskrit Bakhshali manuscript, on > > medieval Indian mathematics, by Takao Hayashi was typset entirely in TeX. > > So was the recent book, History of Indian Mathematics, by Kim Plofker. > > I did not know that, but it makes sense. > > > In fact, TeX is the tool of choice for most people working at the forefront > > of the history of Indian mathematics. > > TeX is most common for people writing any kind of mathematics, including > engineers, physicists, and computer scientists. However, my point was > slightly different -- in a text that is almost entirely in Sanskrit (not a > contemporary translation of a Sanskrit work or a work presented mathematics > originally found in a Sanskrit text), there is unlikely to be much use for > math notation. > > Regards, > > Shrisha Rao > > > Dominik > > > > > > On 20 December 2010 15:28, Shrisha Rao <[email protected]> wrote: > > El dic 20, 2010, a las 5:05 p.m., Ulrike Fischer escribió: > > > > > Am Mon, 20 Dec 2010 16:55:07 +0530 schrieb Shrisha Rao: > > > > > >> I tried inserting the \catcode`\^=11, etc., right after > > >> \begin{document} and that seems to work. > > > > > > As long as you don't use ^ in math. In general it is better to keep > > > such changes local. > > > > Not very likely that math mode superscript/power notation will need to be > > used in Sanskrit texts, but I see your point. > > > > Regards, > > > > Shrisha Rao > > > > > Ulrike Fischer > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
