Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature request: larger operators variant #15

Closed
tytyvillus opened this issue Jun 27, 2019 · 7 comments
Closed

Feature request: larger operators variant #15

tytyvillus opened this issue Jun 27, 2019 · 7 comments

Comments

@tytyvillus
Copy link

I’ve been using Garamond Math for some months now to my great pleasure. One thing I’ve found, however, is that operators and relations like ∪, +, = etc. are a little small with respect to other founts, and I think it makes equations a little bit harder to read. Would it be possible — if it’s not too much work — to have a stylistic set where these are a little larger?

Compare the images below: the first one has the same line first in Garamond Math then in Latin Modern Math. You’ll notice that ×, ∪ and = are ever so slightly larger in the second line. The symbols could even be a little larger, as in the second image taken from an XVIIIᵗʰ-century book.

@stone-zeng
Copy link
Collaborator

@YuanshengZhao
Copy link
Owner

I do not think a new stylistic set is necessary -- just modifying the current glyph is better.
But please give me some time as I have beem very busy recently. Also it might take some effort to make everything looks consistent.

@tytyvillus
Copy link
Author

The current symbols look perfectly reasonable for prose-based arithmetic — perhaps consider keeping them as an additional stylistic set. Take as long as you need ;)

@YuanshengZhao
Copy link
Owner

The new symbols are in ss11. I will leave this issue open until (I think) the symbols are complete and consistent.
image
image
image

@tytyvillus
Copy link
Author

Sorry if this is a silly question, but has the .otf file been updated with the new operators?

Thank you

@stone-zeng
Copy link
Collaborator

Not yet (you may check it at this link, it's still at 0c0f55c).

@tytyvillus
Copy link
Author

tytyvillus commented Sep 6, 2019 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants