Re: Digits (Was: What a difference a glyph makes...)

From: John Cowan (
Date: Thu Jul 27 2000 - 15:20:14 EDT wrote:

> The line gets drawn somewhere, and
> there's a very strong consensus that Unicode is right in not having
> abstract characters to denote things like bold and italic.

Except in math symbols, where Unicode will soon acquire them. In
math, _sin_ would be the product of _s_, _i_, and _n_, whereas
non-italic "sin" stands for "sine".


Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:06 EDT