[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Groff] periodcentered vs. dotmath

From: Ted Harding
Subject: RE: [Groff] periodcentered vs. dotmath
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 10:22:07 +0100 (BST)

On 28-Apr-00 Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> Is latin-1 glyph 183's PS name `periodcentered' or `dotmath'?  There
> is an interesting ambiguity between these two characters;
> additionally, these glyphs are not unified in Unicode.  For example,
> you can't access Times-Roman's glyph 183 with a groff glyph name; you
> have to use char183 (or \C) which is unfortunate.
> I will add a new glyph name `pc' which represents periodcentered (and
> retain `md' -- middle dot -- for dotmath).
> Comments?

Hi Werner and all,

The folllowing is such information as I have to hand:

In the PostScript Standard Roman Character Set the character
with StandardEncoding 264 (octal), 180 (dec) which also has
ISOLatin1Encoding 267 (oct) 183 (dec) has the PostScript name

In the PostScript Symbol Character Set the character with
Symbol Encoding 327 (octal), 215 (dec) has the PostScript
name "dotmath".

(The Symbol character with octal encoding 267 is "bullet").

The ISO-Latin1 (iso-8859-1) name of the character with
code 183 (dec) is "MIDDLE DOT", corresponding to PostScript

Looking at my PostScript Reference Manual, there seems to be
a very slight difference between the dot printed for
"periodcentered" and the dot printed for "dotmath", the latter
seeming to be very slightly smaller; however, I can't be sure
of this.

In any case, these are two logically distinct characters, whether
they print the same or not.

I hope this helps. Any comments, anyone?

E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <address@hidden>
Date: 28-Apr-00                                       Time: 10:22:06
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]