> > > > Also, Unicode does include Fraktur characters. > > > > > > but in mathematical symbols - that is a completely different beast > > > > Please explain why it matters to the reader whether the letter A is > > classifed by the unicode consortium as mathematical [or not]?
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 08:38:21AM +0200, Radovan Garabik wrote: > because mathematical letter is a different than "normal" letter. > They might look alike, but (depending on typography), often > do not. Of course, this doesn't prevent other uses. But you're right, that only a limited selection (e.g. not Han) of characters enjoy bold code points. > You can make a text bold, and meaning will remain. If you make a > mathematical expression all bold, it will have a completely different > meaning. So? Let's imagine you're composing an html document. What's to prevent you from wrapping a mathematical alphanumeric character with <b></b>? > > You're telling me why the context matters. You're not telling me why > > the unicode naming of the code points matters. > > > > If the reader sees "Branden", why should it matter whether any underlying > > code points were designated by the consortium as mathematical? If the > > because if code points are mathematical, I parse it as > B \times r \times a \times n \times d \times e \times n But if the context is not mathematical, how can you tell that mathematical code points are used? If I say xy-2yz=0, and I don't use mathematical characters, why would you not interpet that as indicating multiplication? -- Raul
