On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 23:02:10 +0200, Hans Hagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nico wrote: >> On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:18:32 +0200, Taco Hoekwater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi nico/Hans, >>> >>> Hans Hagen wrote: >>> >>>>> <mo> ¯ </mo> >>>>> >>> The MathML spec specifically suggests the use of ‾ instead >>> of a literal accent character in situations like this. >> >> The problem is that it is also specified to which unicode character is >> mapped the entity (http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/isodia.html). Actually >> ‾ is U00AF. >> > the messy part is that > > - a macron has no stretch > - an overbar has stretch > > so, while there is a lot math stuf (now) in unicode, the macron is used > for an overbar which is rather strange; do they also 'misuse' the > underscore for underbar etc? I guess that in MathML stretchiness is more systematic and should apply to most characters, provided that they can stretch (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-MathML/chap3_2.html). In this doc it is said: "By default, most horizontal arrows and some accents stretch horizontally." > now an implementation needs to adapt to math or text (or just gamble > since it may be that i want a non stretchable macron over x+y+z); my > guess is that as a result, many implementations are more complex than > needed From my little window (since I don't know how it works internally) I would say that in mathml stretchiness is required in things like <mover> or <munder>, if the character allows it, and depending on stretch attribute. But it's sure that it does not make things easier. > (btw, in pure text, it's still not clear if the macro glyph sould be > chosen or a stretchable hrule) What is not clear to me is if unicode explicitely allows a combination of a non spacing mark (accent) and a *group* of characters. In the specification I've only seen that it can apply to a base character. If it can apply only to one character, a glyph seems enough. > (i think that one problem of unicode/xml/mathml is that it is used in > typesetting systems but not in all aspects is designed (or used) to > facilitate high end results; therefore a 24/32 bit tex still needs to > provide much detailed control) Yep! Regards, BG _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
