Timeline for Does the LaTeX $\eqslantless$ symbol, or the comparable Unicode ⋜, have a well defined meaning for binary numerical relationships? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 17, 2017 at 3:03 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jan 17, 2017 at 15:12 | |||||
| Jan 11, 2017 at 0:05 | comment | added | Jon | Asking the question on a LaTeX site isn't helpful; all that's going to turn up is that the macro turns into the symbol. Is there a less research-level math overflow-style site this question would be more appropriate for? Ah, OK, trying math.stackexchange.com then. | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 14:58 | comment | added | Gro-Tsen | I think the question is on-topic if we interpret it as "does this symbol have a standard meaning in mathematics" (excluding all the other domains mentioned, and not limiting ourselves to "binary numerical relationship"(?). That being said, I think the answer is emphatically "no", which doesn't make it very interesting. Many mathematical symbols simply mean whatever the author defines them to mean, and anyone using ⪕ should define it before using it. | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 14:32 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Jan 10, 2017 at 16:59 | |||||
| Jan 10, 2017 at 13:48 | comment | added | Pat Devlin | I like this question, but it's not in the scope of this forum. I think maybe there's a latex SE. | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 13:43 | history | closed |
abx R.P. Michael Albanese Stefan Waldmann Jeremy Rickard |
Not suitable for this site | |
| Jan 10, 2017 at 13:16 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 10, 2017 at 13:45 | |||||
| Jan 10, 2017 at 12:50 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 10, 2017 at 13:08 | |||||
| Jan 10, 2017 at 12:47 | history | asked | Jon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |