[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] On the glyphs `~=' and `|='
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] On the glyphs `~=' and `|=' |
Date: |
Wed, 01 Jan 2003 10:08:44 +0100 (CET) |
> Let me see if I understood:
>
> ~= <nil>
No. It's the same as `~~' for backwards compatibility in groff. I
only discourage its use.
> =~ U+2245
Yes.
> ~~ U+2248
Yes
> |= U+2243 -->> Hmmm.... Wouldn't \(-~ or \(~- be more mnemonic?
Of course, but `|=' is in CSTR 54 so I won't change that. In the
next version of groff, you can always say
.char -~ u2243
to avoid any ambiguities.
> What about:
>
> -~ -> U+2242
> ~- -> U+2243
> |~ -> U+2244
> |= -> U+2246?
> ~= -> U+224A, or better yet, U+224C?
Not `officially'. I won't introduce new glyph names (with some
exception as `|~' since it is in CSTR 54).
> Sorry I don't have the English Unicode names table handy, I am
> cheating with the char map utility in Win2K and looking at the
> glyphs in Lucida Sans Unicode, all names are translated to Spanish
> :). Of course this is an academic exercise, for anything but the DVI
> driver (symbol doesn't have most of these glyphs, and the CM Math
> fonts have some but not all of them).
Most of them can be easily constructed.
Werner
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [Groff] On the glyphs `~=' and `|=',
Werner LEMBERG <=