Re: Script L

From: Raymond Mercier (
Date: Sat Mar 18 2006 - 06:25:49 CST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Representative glyphs for combining kannada signs"

    Asmus Freytag writes
    > It would be nice to exclude the possibility that this is just a case of a
    > different script font being used. Are there any other script style
    > variables in the notation or the book?

    No, unless one counts the script pi U+03D6 ϖ. The inclusion of that in the
    Unicode block Greek and Coptic would be a sort of precedent, I suppose, in
    support of the inclusion of a script L in Basic Latin. However, unlike the
    script L, the script pi is very common in technical use, although physicists
    always call it 'omega-bar', not seeing that it is the ordinary Greek
    handwritten pi.

    Looking through my bookshelf I get the impression that French works seem to
    go for script forms, and I attach two examples from R. Godement's Théorie
    des Faisceaux, Paris, 1958. Here we have a script L more in keeping with
    U+2112, and other script forms, but these all agree well with the Unicode
    block Mathematical Alphnumeric Symbols; there is also an M which must surely
    be Fraktur U+1D510. Compared with this usage, Billard's script L does seem
    rather eccentric.
    Normally in the translation of a technical work one tries to keep to the
    notation of the original, but in this case I am wondering what is best.
    There would be no harm in using the more conventional script L U+2112.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 18 2006 - 06:30:41 CST