Superscript and Subscript Characters in General Use
charupdate at orange.fr
Wed Jan 11 00:00:52 CST 2017
On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 14:34:17 -0800, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> Just get over it […]
We are facing a strong user demand since early standards.
Actually I cannot. Sorry.
Thank you however for all of your feedback.
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:03:24 +0000, Alastair Houghton wrote:
> […] I think also that the thread is increasingly verbose and hard to follow.
Itʼs very hard for me too. But Iʼll try to be concise.
Thank you for involving in the issue.
> […] for limited use in “plain text”-only contexts (Twitter, for instance).
The phenomenon isnʼt actually limited to plain text environments. See:
| You can also use the straight unicode approach to render ¹⁹⁄₄₅:
| (See the wikipedia article.)
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:51:21 +0000, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> I would suggest using a pair of variation selectors instead. It's no
> messier than ideographic compatibility characters, and I think it is
> actually less messy. However, I would further suggest creating the
> variation sequences only when the corresponding superscript or subscript
> form does not exist.
This clearly advocates the current use of the superscript and subscript forms.
Thank you for considering the issue.
Thanks to all who responded in these threads.
Converting preformatted to TeX formatted:
My conversion macro was too simplistic, it was made up hastily, sorry.
An improved version (perhaps overkill now) is attached below.
Iʼd have liked to port it to Vim, too.
The macros for productivity suites are sadly still missing.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 91768 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Unicode