[NTG-context] Monospace fallback kerning
braslau.list at comcast.net
Wed Dec 19 19:28:50 CET 2018
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:16:23 +0100
Hans Åberg <haberg-1 at telia.com> wrote:
> > On 19 Dec 2018, at 19:01, Alan Braslau <braslau.list at comcast.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 18:46:30 +0100
> > Hans Åberg <haberg-1 at telia.com> 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.
More information about the ntg-context