Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: [About Unicode] Why the symbol LOGICAL NOT is missing from
 On Friday 04 March 2005 07:08 am, David Carlisle wrote: > > I've never heard of those... > > I take it you are not a mathematician. Nah... I cheated in my calculus exams... I had one of those Sharp handheld computers.. which I programmed it to solve integral calculus.... doing the assembly language was more fun than doing the math... > I don't read Arabic (or Hebrew or Russian or Chinese or several other > languages that don't use a latin alphabet), so I wouldn't > comment on the usability of the symbols used in those languages. > mathematics uses a very rich alphabet, perhaps you don't read > mathematics, which is fine, but in that case you probably shouldn't > comment on the usability of its alphabet. Yeah but sweeping generalisations are always a great way to start the most interesting of conversations..... > for example > > http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2200.pdf > > (the upside down A for "forall" is the first character on that chart) > > > it's not so much about like or dislike... but rather doing markup in such > > a way that the xml can easily handle what we do most... > > It's odd that you should say that as I thought you were proposing a data > format that looked a bit like XML but unable to be read by XML parsers > due to unescaped &'s?. Do they crash do they...? that's a pity... :-) > > and for many that is transporting business data around the place. > > the original poster gave no indication that was what he was doing. > It was a perfectly reasonable question. > he had used LOGICAL AND and LOGICAL OR (which by the way look like ^ and > v more or less) presumably in a mathematical expression and was looking > for the not operator so searched for it (in vain) under the name > LOGICAL NOT which wasn't a bad guess. But the Unicode names of > characters (even characters used for expressing logic) have more to do > with history than logic and so this character is called NOT SIGN > so he didn't find it, hence the posted question. Fascinating stuff.... > David > (Co chair of the W3C Math Interest Group, and co editor of the MathML > spec, so I have an interest in using Mathematical symbols in XML > documents:-) Now it makes sense...... I can still markup formulas easy enough...... <Newton> Formula&="F=M*A" </Newton> but I won't go any deeper... only embarass myself with my ignorance. My only trailing comment is to say that xml markup is in itself a type of formula language. Or, more accurately, it is a form of expression not so much for the question, but rather the results. <Impact> Force#=345 Scale&="KPa" </Impact> Best Regards David -- Computergrid : The ones with the most connections win. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
