Hi,
Unicode 6.0.0, chapter 15
(http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.0.0/ch15.pdf) reveals some
information:
Unicode does provide \imath and \jmath symbols (u+1d6a4 und u+1d6a5),
but these are part of the regular, italic Latin math alphabet, so any
markup such as \mathbf will be lost on them. [In difference to the usual
TeX-behavior of \imath and \jmath]
But Unicode also specifies, that \imath and \jmath need not be used in
simple cases, since \hat i should yield a dotless i with a circumflex on
top. [i and j have the Soft_Dotted property]
\imath and \jmath are provided for cases, in which the \hat (or other
diacritical marks) spans more than a single letter, such as
\widehat{a+i}=\hat a+\hat i
I still don't understand, why this equation couldn't possibly be bold,
but Unicode only provides for regular italic.
So in your case, \mathbf{\hat i}, \hat\mathbf{i} (with unicode-math) or
\hat 𝒊 [u+1d48a] should yield the desired result, but it doesn't (at
least with me).
bye
Toscho
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
