Laurent Siebenmann wrote (commenting on Hans Aberg):
> > The AMSFonts "Euler script" font is upright, and the TeX "calligraphic"
> > font is slanted (but none are very "scripty"), so why not designing a new
> > font?
>
> rsfs, Ralph Smith's Formal Script on CTAN is excellent, and so clearly
> distinct from Euler script that the two can be used concurrently for
> different things.
Yes, and rsfs is enough `scripty' I suppose, but it is still
lacking the lowercase letters. This was one suggestion/topic
in the article of Justin Ziegler (TeXnical working group on
extended math font encoding), but that was about one and a half
year ago and I haven't heard of that ever since.
TeX's standard `calligraphic' alphabet also lacks the lowercase (so
I won't call that a proper font yet).
Of course, uppercase is needed an used far more often than lowercase
in these fonts. And may be lowercase letters in these three fonts
(if they would exist) could be a bit confusing, when used alongside
in the same text.
May be there should be a fourth scriptlike font, or at least parts of
an alphabet in such a style, to be used for some special one letter symbols,
containing for example
P for the power set (also mentioned in J. Ziegler's article)
C to denote the set of continuous / continuous differentiable functions
(as in C^k(\mathbf{R}) or the like)
O and o for the Landau symbols (denoting the order of magnitude of
a function)
and so on, so that these would have special reserved symbols which do not
use one of the other script styles (as these may be used to denote a
certain concept). Here, again, a (imho) `bad tradition' again interferes:
the angloamerican usage of Fraktur R and I to denote real and imaginary
part: if the Fraktur alphabet is used for some other concept, this could
be quite confusing (German normally uses \mathrm{Re} and \mathrm{Im} for
this).
Johannes Kuester

Johannes Kuester [log in to unmask]
Mathematisches Institut der
Technischen Universitaet Muenchen
