Re: Draft Standard Text, V02.1
I like bold face for intervals. That's what I have been using
(except in my joint work with Ray Moore), and that's what
Arnold has been using in his printed work. Arnold suggested
a LaTeX file some years ago that defined \x to be
"math boldface x", etc. However, there were clashes with other
definitions files that used single letter macros. Hence, Arnold
started using \xx, \aa, \bb, \cc, etc. to define "math boldface x",
"math boldface a," etc. Hence, you see the "xx" in plain text versions.
However, it's not a "show stopper" for me no matter what we use,
as long as it is consistent throughout the document. Now, back
to the real work ...
Best regards,
Baker
On 3/16/2010 14:22, Michel Hack wrote:
I've wondered in the past whether to speak up about the convention
of using boldface to distinguish intervals from scalars, as opposed
to duplication (e.g. x \in xx), which is what Arnold used in the
plain-text version of the Vienna proposal. The distinction is not
always very visible (and in some contexts, e.g. text extraction, it
can be completely invisible).
Jürgen now spotted an actual confusion near the end of 4.4.1 on p. 13.
How about bold-face duplication?
Michel.
---Sent: 2010-03-16 19:29:55 UTC
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
R. Baker Kearfott, rbk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (337) 482-5346 (fax)
(337) 482-5270 (work) (337) 993-1827 (home)
URL: http://interval.louisiana.edu/kearfott.html
Department of Mathematics, University of Louisiana at Lafayette
(Room 217 Maxim D. Doucet Hall, 1403 Johnston Street)
Box 4-1010, Lafayette, LA 70504-1010, USA
---------------------------------------------------------------