Skip to content
GitLab

STIX feedback · Changes

Page history
Updated STIX feedback (markdown) authored by Davide P. Cervone's avatar Davide P. Cervone
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
STIX-feedback.md
View page @ 4e647323
......@@ -32,7 +32,9 @@
* Is STIX-Word missing glyphs from STIX-General?
The pdf included in the STIX fonts release from February 2012 indicates some changes. Most of the glyphs that were used for the extra DELIMITERS list were found ; some of them seemed to be lost but could be replaced by equivalent glyphs.
> Fred: @Davide, did you find missing glyphs that are important for MathJax?
The main difference is the loss of bold versions of some of some characters in the STIXMath-Regular.otf font. These include all the Size1 through Size5 forms (e.g., large parentheses, large integrals, large summation signs, wide tildes and other accents, etc.). Although not strictly needed by MathJax, currently these are accessible via `\boldsymbol`, and help when math is used in a bold context.
In addition, bold versions of a number of variant forms (the contents of STIXVariants-Bold.otf) are missing. Again, not strictly needed by MathJax, these where in the old fonts, and aren't in the new ones. Also missing are bold versions of the integral variations (small, display, up, small up, display up). These are not currently available in MathJax. Finally, the bold versions of the characters at U+E150 to U+E153 from STIXNonUnicode-Bold.otf are missing.
* Most of the glyphs from STIX-Regular.otf and STIXMath-Regular.otf seem to be duplicate. Currently, our Python script that generates the Web fonts do not preserse this duplication but has to pick some from STIX-Regular.otf and other from STIXMath-Regular.otf. It would simplify a bit the script if the two are merged in a single file.
......