Re: A last missing link for interoperable representation

From: Hans Åberg via Unicode <unicode_at_unicode.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 10:30:34 +0100

> On 15 Jan 2019, at 02:18, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <unicode_at_unicode.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:02:05 -0800
> Asmus Freytag via Unicode <unicode_at_unicode.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/14/2019 3:37 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:02:49 +0100
>> Hans Åberg via Unicode <unicode_at_unicode.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 14 Jan 2019, at 23:43, James Kass via Unicode
>> <unicode_at_unicode.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hans Åberg wrote,
>>
>> How about using U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT: 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒́
>>
>> Thought about using a combining accent. Figured it would just
>> display with a dotted circle but neglected to try it out first. It
>> actually renders perfectly here. /That's/ good to know. (smile)
>>
>> It is a bit off here. One can try math, too: the derivative of 𝛾(𝑡)
>> is 𝛾̇(𝑡).
>>
>> No it isn't. You should be using a spacing character for
>> differentiation.
>>
>> Sorry, but there may be different conventions. The dot / double-dot
>> above is definitely common usage in physics.

Also in differential geometry, as for curves.

>> A./
>
> Apologies. It was positioned in the parenthesis, and it looked like a
> misplaced U+0301.

In MacOS, one can drop the combined character into the character table, and see that it is U+0307 COMBINING DOT ABOVE.

It comes out right when typeset in ConTeXt.
Received on Tue Jan 15 2019 - 03:30:57 CST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jan 15 2019 - 03:30:57 CST