Re: lynx-dev Superscripts

[Philip Webb]

000605 Klaus Weide wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2000, Sergei Pokrovsky wrote:
>> ,----
>> | Ekz-e la lingvo 
>> | <p align="center">{ab, aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbbb, ... 
>> | a<sup>n</sup>b<sup>n</sup> ... }</p>estas lineara.
>> | <p>
>> | Iam oni ankaÅ­ konsideras la "rigore pozitivan" lingvoiteracion
>> | <p align="center">L<sup>+</sup> = L + L² + L³ + ...
>> | </p>(angle <i lang="en">Kleene plus</i>).
>> | <p>
>> | La normo</a> de <em>C<sup>-1</sup>MC</em>.<p>
>> `----

assuming this is Esperanto, what is `Ekz-e'? shouldn't `lineara' be `linia'?
and `lingvoiteracion' be `lingvoripeto'? the last line is not a sentence
& what does `C raised to the power -1 times M times C' mean, if not `M' ?
if you want to be taken seriously, you have to offer real-life examples
(gentle frown).

>> is rendered as
>> ,----
>> |    Ekz-e la lingvo
>> |    
>> |                {ab, aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbbb, ... a^nb^n ... }
>> |    estas lineara.
>> |    
>> |    Iam oni konsideras la "rigore pozitivan" lingvoiteracion
>> |    
>> |                            L+ = L + L² + L³ + ...
>> |    (angle Kleene plus).
>> |    
>> |    La normoj
>> |    de  C^-1MC.
>> `----

using 2-8-3dev.14 with tagsoup, i get a slightly better:

   Ekz-e la lingvo
   
               {ab, aabb, aaabbb, aaaabbbbb, ... a^nb^n ... }
                                      
   estas lineara.
   
   Iam oni ankaÅ konsideras la "rigore pozitivan" lingvoiteracion
   
                          L+ = L + L² + L³ + ...
                                      
   (angle Kleene plus).
   
   La normo de C^-1MC.

with `Kleene plus' & `C^-1MC' underlined &  \nnn  appearing as characters.
presumably `\305' is the code for `u^', as i vulgarly transliterate it
(Zamenhof used an inverted circumflex, whatever that's called).
   
>> I'd prefer to see  C^{-1}MC 
>> I cannot understand why  L<sup>+</sup>  becomes mere  L+ ?
>>  L<sup>+1</sup>  also becomes "L+1".
> CHANGES 1999-11-03 (2.8.3dev.14)
> * changes for SUP and SUB:  Render SUP visibly as a '^' character
>   if it needs to be separated from a preceding character in order
>   to prevent misinterpretation.  The test currently used is isxdigit
>   for the the preceding character.  Render <SUB> and </SUB> always
>   as brackets '[' and ']' respectively.  SUB is mostly used
>   in technical material while SUP occurs frequently in pages
>   of general nature where it is not essential, therefore
>   the different treatment.
> Obviously that's a compromise.  When I added that change, I was trying
> to avoid the most obvious misreadings (like 2<SUP>2</SUP> => 22), while
> at the same time avoiding that "blah blah<SUP>&trade</SUP>." becomes
                                                ^^^^^^; (isn't it?)
> "blah blah^{(TM)}." or similar instead of just "blah blah(TM).".
> The latter use for SUP seems much more widespread than its use for math,
> for which support in HTML (and in lynx) is quite poor anyway.

belated thanx for this improvement.  
i would prefer to see all  <sup> ... </sup> 's treated the same,
regardless whether the preceding character is a digit:
ie  2<sup>n</sup>  wb  2^n  (or  superscript-n  if available)
&   2<sup>-1</sup>     2^{-1} ,
even if that does result in your trademark example above.
i come across these things in math documents;
elsewhere, it seems best to reveal the mark-up in any case.
subject to others' comments, might you consider another tiny patch?

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden