[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: \sim versus \thicksim

Matthias Clasen writes:
 > Yes, it is nice to have bold versions of all symbols, but one basic design
 > decision in YAASP was to have no slots for bold symbols in the encoding and
 > instead use bold fonts implementing the same encoding. That is why I proposed
 > to implement the \thicksim macro as \boldsymbol{\sim}. IIRC the boldmath.sty
 > version of \boldsymbol is clever enough to pick the symbol from the bold
 > version and construct a \mathrel atom from it.

yes the basic design idea was aviod including both normal and bold
version of a symbol into the encodings but to say: if you do want the
bold symbols of encoding M?? load another font with the same encoding
but bold letters in it.

thus i would say that \thicksim etc should not be included in one of
the basic encodings (unless there was some good reason for it
inclusion --- perhaps Ulrik knows about that one looking through his
archives)

frank