Doubt about OpenSymbol and Math
olivier.hallot at documentfoundation.org
Tue Jun 4 05:17:25 PDT 2013
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Em 04-06-2013 06:43, Noel Grandin escreveu:
> I think the question that Marcos is asking is a little different.
> Math typography is slightly weird in that people like to invent their
> own symbols, and symbols are often very particular to quite a small
> group of mathematicians.
> Lots of the more common symbols have local variants that are only used
> within a specific nation, or within a grouping of academic institutions.
> So no font is ever going to be able to capture more than the most widely
> used variants of the symbols.
> So what I think he wants is the ability to define custom new shapes at
> runtime and add them to some kind of gallery, and to be able to embed
> them into a document.
This is what I suspect STIX(1) fonts are about: provide to scientific
community a font that covers all/most of the math/science demands. You
will notice that STIX fonts has a quite hefty support organizations.
So basically, given that STIX has all the symbols, why do we need
OpenSymbol and the work to fill the gaps?
Side note1: Does it make sense to embed fonts in a Math file (as in
Side note2: LO can do a marketing fuss if it supports STIX natively.
Founder, Board of Directors Member - The Document Foundation
The Document Foundation, Zimmerstr. 69, 10117 Berlin, Germany
Fundação responsável civilmente, de acordo com o direito civil
Detalhes Legais: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
LibreOffice translation leader for Brazilian Portuguese
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the LibreOffice