Re: [NTG-context] Monospace fallback kerning

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:16:23 +0100 Hans Åberg wrote:

...

On 19 Dec 2018, at 19:01, Alan Braslau wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 18:46:30 +0100 Hans Åberg wrote:

...

Though probably non-standard in typesetting, one might make a slight typographic difference between 𝑥²₀ and 𝑥₀² by letting the sub- or superscripts that come later partially, but not fully, to the position of the one that comes before. For example, 𝑥₀² might mean the square of 𝑥₀, and 𝑥²₀ the component 0 of 𝑥², not necessarily the same. Traditionally, such things are left for the reader to interpret.

Isn't that poor nomenclature, being ambiguous?

Indeed, but also the norm due to practical limitations.

...

I would explicitly write (𝑥₀)² or (𝑥²)₀ in such cases, and I have also seen 𝑥²|₀ used for example, or other non-ambiguous shorthands.

Perhaps it might become cumbersome to carry such notation along all through, reserving it for definitions.

In physics, we love such constructions, such as the so-called Einstein notation as one example. Alan