Timeline for Suggestions and feature requests for the design of a font for math articles/books
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 12 at 23:33 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixing my typo
|
| Feb 12 at 20:48 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | @user160623 But the trace is not a product (i.e., a binary operator). After thinking about it a bit more, I seem to recall seeing $\rm sh$ being used for a shuffle product, but (I think) only because the character ш was not available. But even this example just reinforces my impression that people would like a nice symbol for the wreath product and find the current situation suboptimal. | |
| Feb 12 at 18:24 | comment | added | user160623 | In reponse to "offhand, I can't think of any other product that people represent using two Latin characters", the matrix trace is sometimes denoted $tr$ | |
| Feb 11 at 23:53 | comment | added | Emily |
@LSpice I do, thanks for the correction! Regarding the arrow implementation, I think a good way to approach this might be to have specific implementations of the arrows that are already in common usage (like ⇸) while also making the package compatible with tikz-cd (i.e. ensuring the arrows and decorations generated by tikz-cd match the font in style), as it would then serve as a powerful engine for making custom arrows of matching style with the font.
|
|
| Feb 11 at 22:27 | history | edited | Timothy Chow | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixed formatting
|
| Feb 11 at 22:23 | comment | added | LSpice | I took the liberty of editing in a screenshot from Jacobson (as well as linking to the actual page on Google Books), for anyone curious as I was about the glyph in question. I hope that that was all right. | |
| Feb 11 at 22:22 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Wreath product notation; titles for links; `\texttt` to backticks
|
| Feb 11 at 22:16 | comment | added | LSpice | @Emily, re, do you mean Definition 1.1.23, rather than 1.1.24, of the Riehl–Verity book, as your link suggests? (Also, I'm not a font designer—is it really better to try to anticipate everyone's arrow-based decorations at one glyph apiece, rather than to provide a flexible way of assembling and modifying arrows? Or is the latter what you mean, and I've misunderstood?) | |
| Feb 11 at 18:17 | comment | added | Emily | 4) Extensible arrows, both as in $\vec{v}$ and $\underset{\scriptsize\to}{v}$ as well as in $A\xrightarrow{f}B$, are another point that always bothered me. There are even a few of these that are used in practice but lack a standard implementation, such as ⇸ for profunctors, Riehl–Verity's arrows as in e.g. Definitions 1.1.24 and 1.1.25 of their book, a version of $\rightleftarrows$ with $\dashv$ for adjunctions, and so on. I'll probably end up implementing dozens and dozens of these. | |
| Feb 11 at 18:15 | comment | added | Emily | 3) The unconsistent size for binary symbols like $\mathord{\times}\mathord{\otimes}\mathord{\boxtimes}\mathord{\square}$ had always bothered me too, I think there are probably even more such symbols in practice which could be standardized in size with respect to each other, like e.g. $\mathord{\diamond}$ as in $\mathord{\times}\mathord{\otimes}\mathord{\boxtimes}\mathord{\square}\mathord{\diamond}$. | |
| Feb 11 at 18:14 | comment | added | Emily | 2) The wreath symbol in Jacobson is really interesting; I had never seen it before, but I did feel a bit dissatisfied with the symbol $\wr$ for wreath products. This makes me wonder whether there are similar situations for other symbols, unavailable in LaTeX but nice and useful in practice. | |
| Feb 11 at 18:12 | comment | added | Emily |
Here are some more specific points: 1) I've decided to make all three variations for blackboard bold, chosen with something like \usepackage[bb=X]{darwin} with X=ams, txof, vertical (or perhaps names that don't make references to specific fonts, but which describe what the style looks like, such as curved, empty-fill, and vertical. I'll think carefully about this)
|
|
| Feb 11 at 18:12 | comment | added | Emily | Thank you so much for putting together such a detailed list of suggestions, Timothy! I truly appreciate it and will be sure to implement all of them! | |
| Feb 11 at 17:04 | comment | added | LSpice |
I know it's not the point, but, just for reference (and until we have this new font!), amsmath provides $\displaystyle\sideset{}'\sum_{m, n} \frac1{(mz + n)^{2k}}$ \sideset{}'\sum_{m, n} \frac1{(mz + n)^{2k}}, and an answer to a TeXSE question of mine (which was a duplicate suggested an ingenious double-\reflectbox, \reflectbox{$\vec{\reflectbox{\!$v$}} (obviously best encapsulated as a macro, as in that answer!).
|
|
| Feb 11 at 13:45 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek |
Just so that you know: the homegrown implementation of LaTeX on Wikipedia in theory supports \mathbin, \mathrel, and the like, but in practice they have no effect, because due to a mindbogglingly stupid design decision, the parser normalizes LaTeX input such that it puts braces around everything.
|
|
| S Feb 11 at 13:22 | history | answered | Timothy Chow | CC BY-SA 4.0 | |
| S Feb 11 at 13:22 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Timothy Chow |