Re: AMS symbols in the math panel

2002-01-28 Thread Angus Leeming
On Friday 18 January 2002 8:27 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 04:43:28PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote: > > > 1. The relation/negated relations subpanels are way too tall. > > > > 2. The size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the AMS symbols are larger than > > the size of the sy

Re: AMS symbols in the math panel

2002-01-21 Thread Martin Vermeer
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 10:27:14PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 04:43:28PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote: > > > 1. The relation/negated relations subpanels are way too tall. > > > > 2. The size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the AMS symbols are larger than > > the size o

Re: AMS symbols in the math panel

2002-01-18 Thread Martin Vermeer
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 04:43:28PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote: > 1. The relation/negated relations subpanels are way too tall. > > 2. The size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the AMS symbols are larger than > the size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the latex symbols. > It is not too important, b

Re: AMS symbols in the math panel

2002-01-18 Thread Martin Vermeer
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 04:43:28PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote: > 1. The relation/negated relations subpanels are way too tall. > > 2. The size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the AMS symbols are larger than > the size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the latex symbols. > It is not too important, b

AMS symbols in the math panel

2002-01-18 Thread Dekel Tsur
1. The relation/negated relations subpanels are way too tall. 2. The size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the AMS symbols are larger than the size of the symbols in the .xbm's of the latex symbols. It is not too important, but I still like to have consistency. 3. Perhaps the subpanel for latex