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

Re: Squiggly Arrows

At 11:20 +0200 98/06/02, Ulrik Vieth wrote:
>So far, we have also kept the right-point squiggly arrow from LASY
>in MSP for latexsym-compatibility, but this is causing trouble for
>the non-CM versions.  I therefore wouldn't be too much opposed to
>dropping it completely from MSP, should the addition of further glyphs
>from the STIX collection eventually lead to a further reshuffling
>of the encoding tables.

  I wonder if there us a graphic and/or traditional semantic difference
between the \leadsto latexsym arrow and the AMS Fonts \rightsquigarrow,
sufficiently big that people would want to use them side by side?

  The thing is that I noted that when I wrote the arrow I wanted by hand,
then it looked like the \leadsto arrow, even though I at first used the
\rightsquigarrow in print. So it might be good having both, because
sometimes it seems difficult to find good descriptive arrows -- all the
other types seems to be occupied. (Same problem as for binary relations.)