Hello, a suggestion for \celsius in core-mis.tex: \def\celsius#1{#1\,\mathematics{^\circ}\kern-0.1emC} The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding? Cheers, Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/
Peter Münster wrote:
Hello,
a suggestion for \celsius in core-mis.tex: \def\celsius#1{#1\,\mathematics{^\circ}\kern-0.1emC}
As is (perhaps) normal for this kind of thing, the "\," depends on your local typesetting tradition, and the "\kern-0.1em" depends on the used font family. That is not to say yours isn't better then the current one :-)
The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding?
Yes, it does, so there should be a named character created for it. IIRC, these symbols are in one of the unicode planes that are not (completely) supported yet. It would make sense to do a whole block (partial plane) at the same time then? Cheers, Taco
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Peter M�nster wrote:
Hello,
a suggestion for \celsius in core-mis.tex: \def\celsius#1{#1\,\mathematics{^\circ}\kern-0.1emC}
As is (perhaps) normal for this kind of thing, the "\," depends on your local typesetting tradition, and the "\kern-0.1em" depends on the used font family.
That is not to say yours isn't better then the current one :-)
The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding?
Yes, it does, so there should be a named character created for it.
IIRC, these symbols are in one of the unicode planes that are not (completely) supported yet. It would make sense to do a whole block (partial plane) at the same time then?
indeed Hans
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Peter M�nster wrote:
Hello,
a suggestion for \celsius in core-mis.tex: \def\celsius#1{#1\,\mathematics{^\circ}\kern-0.1emC}
As is (perhaps) normal for this kind of thing, the "\," depends on your local typesetting tradition, and the "\kern-0.1em" depends on the used font family.
That is not to say yours isn't better then the current one :-)
The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding?
Yes, it does, so there should be a named character created for it.
IIRC, these symbols are in one of the unicode planes that are not (completely) supported yet. It would make sense to do a whole block (partial plane) at the same time then?
i wonder what happens with the symbol when one uses it this way: \usemodule[unit] 10 \Square \Inch Hans
� wrote:
Hello,
a suggestion for \celsius in core-mis.tex: \def\celsius#1{#1\,\mathematics{^\circ}\kern-0.1emC}
The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding?
indeed ... what \symbolicnameofquotes do you suggest? i never use inches -) Hans
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Hans Hagen wrote:
indeed ... what \symbolicnameofquotes do you suggest? i never use inches -)
Me neither... ;) Perhaps \doublequote ? Cheers, Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/
Hans Hagen wrote:
Peter Münster wrote:
The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding?
indeed ... what \symbolicnameofquotes do you suggest? i never use inches -)
What about Ux2033, double prime? Or - in TeX dialect - \mathematics{^{\prime\prime}} or simply \mathematics{''} (twice the apostrophe) unless it already exists in the font under the name "second" (according to the Adobe Glyph List). In unicode reference Ux2033 is described as the character used for inches and seconds. Mojca
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Hans Hagen wrote:
Peter Münster wrote:
The symbol for \inch is strange: "}". What is \char125 supposed to be, doesn't it depend on the font encoding?
indeed ... what \symbolicnameofquotes do you suggest? i never use inches -)
What about Ux2033, double prime? Or - in TeX dialect -
Yes, it's double-prime, not double quotes of a certain direction. Also, earlier in the thread:
\usemodule[unit] 10 \Square \Inch
I believe the shortcut forms are only ever used for distances, never for areas. So a rectangle with sides 2" by 4" has 8in^2 surface area.
in^2 is possible, but so is "sq. in." Ick. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Adam T. Lindsay, Computing Dept. atl@comp.lancs.ac.uk Lancaster University, InfoLab21 +44(0)1524/510.514 Lancaster, LA1 4WA, UK Fax:+44(0)1524/510.492 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
participants (5)
-
Adam Lindsay -
Hans Hagen -
Mojca Miklavec -
Peter Münster -
Taco Hoekwater