Re: Useful Unicode
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:22:05 -0400
Message-ID: <47989f10$0$4034$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
JOG wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2:22 am, Tegiri Nenashi <TegiriNena..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 22, 12:56 pm, JOG <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>So impressed was I by mAsterdam's japanese 'reference' symbols, I
>>>decided to add them to my list of useful unicode. Yes, I am indeed,
>>>that cool, and hereby post said list partly as a google-group test,
>>>and partly (perhaps) to assist in the more mathematical cdt
>>>discussions:
>>
>>>inequality : ≠
>>>inference : →
>>>implication : ⇒
>>>not : ¬
>>>and : ∧
>>>or : ∨
>>>xor : ⊕
>>>xor : ⊻
>>>exists : ∃
>>>for all : ∀
>>>membership : ∈
>>>non-membership : ∉
>>>equivalence : ⇔
>>>empty set : ∅
>>>subset : ⊂
>>>proper subset : ⊆
>>>superset : ⊃
>>>proper superset : ⊇
>>>union : ∪
>>>intersection : ∩
>>>cartesian product : ∏
>>>division : ÷
>>>naturals : ℕ
>>>integers : ℤ
>>>rationals : ℚ
>>>reals : ℝ
>>>complex: ℂ
>>>infinity : ∞
>>>references: レ
>>>references unique: ル
>>>masterdam smiley : ☺
>>
>>I believe I saw this rendered correctly, but now that I'm trying to
>>post something on sci.math most of the symbols do not render properly
>>in GG IE!
> > > yeah, checking in IE , the second xor, non-membership, the empty set, > and the naturals, integers, etc, don't render. Hooray for microsoft > and their continued support of standards. Market Failure 101 anyone....
What makes you think there is a market for standardization? Received on Thu Jan 24 2008 - 15:22:05 CET