The TeX collection includes things which are not only mathematical symbols. No need to be so dismissive, Asmus.
On 13 Jul 2012, at 14:24, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 7/13/2012 1:57 AM, Michael Everson wrote:
>> That document is 164 pages long. I would be interested in examining it after someone else has done the background work of a first pass at identifying which characters are already encoded. This is sort of an emoji/wingdings/webdings scenario, I guess. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
>
> The process of encoding mathematical characters has used experts from a coalition of publishers to help make the differentiation between "ad-hoc" and "conventional" symbols. Only if there's a convention around the use of a symbol does it deserve encoding. If there's been a budding convention around some symbol (republication across other works) that was missed by this process, it would be nice to get access to this information from participants.
>
> A./
>
> PS: earlier versions of this document have been consulted in the process of completing the math repertoire
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Received on Fri Jul 13 2012 - 08:39:52 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Jul 13 2012 - 08:39:52 CDT