Re: Too narrowly defined: DIVISION SIGN & COLON

From: Mark Davis ☕ <mark_at_macchiato.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:00:24 -0700

That is, they *may be* spaced differently (depending on the font and
environment).

I'm not against pointing to RATIO for specific math contexts, but to tell
Joe Smith that he should be using a different character to say that "the
ratio of gravel to sand should be 3:1" is artificial and pointless.

------------------------------
Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033>
*
*
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
**

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Khaled Hosny <khaledhosny_at_eglug.org> wrote:

> They are spaced differently. Attached how they are rendered by TeX,
> using its default spacing rules, the first is the ratio (which is spaced
> as a relational symbol) and the second is the colon (which is spaced as
> punctuation mark), both in math mode, and the last one is the colon in
> text mode.
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 04:22:06PM -0700, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
> > I would disagree about the preference for ratio; I think it is a
> historical
> > accident in Unicode.
> >
> > What people use and have used for ratio is simply a colon. One writes
> 3:5, and
> > I doubt that there was a well-established visual difference that
> demanded a
> > separate code for it, so someone would need to write 3∶5 instead.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > — Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Asmus Freytag <asmusf_at_ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > U+2236 RATIO
> > * Used in preference to 003A : to denote division or scale
> >
> >
>
Received on Tue Jul 10 2012 - 20:01:26 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jul 10 2012 - 20:01:26 CDT