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

Re: Inverted (=reflected) N


At 11:35 AM 98/02/05 +0100, Ulrik Vieth wrote:

>While I agree with the logic of this naming scheme, I'm afraid that
>the glyph names in existing AFM files aren't always systematic, not 
>to mention that some glpyhs are named by meaning rather than form, 
>i.e. "suchthat" rather than "epsiloninv" (actually "epsilonrot") 
>or even "nabla" instead of "Deltainv". It is certainly possible to
>introduce a consistent naming scheme in our .etx and .mtx files, 
>but that doesn't solve all problems.

Couple of points:  

(1) It may be worth using the glyph names in 
Lucida Sans Unicode, where they exist (of course, UNICODE
doesn't cover all the math glyphs you want, but quite a few...).

(2) Glyph names aren't quite arbitrary. Some software figures out
the appropriate UNICODE number using a fixed table of
glyph names (ATM for NT being the prime example).

Regards, Berthold.