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

Big (N-nary) operators are at the wrong vertical alignment #268

Open
ronkok opened this issue Jun 18, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Big (N-nary) operators are at the wrong vertical alignment #268

ronkok opened this issue Jun 18, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@ronkok
Copy link

ronkok commented Jun 18, 2024

For big (N-nary) operators, STIX TWO, like other math fonts, has both a standard and an alternate glyph. The alternate glyph is used in what TeX calls displaystyle and what MathML calls display="block".

Some of the alternate glyphs in STIX TWO are at the wrong vertical alignment. They are placed entirely above the baseline. They should instead have a substantial depth (descender) below the baseline. The image below shows the glyphs for Unicode points U+22C2 and U+22C3.

STIX Issue

Latin Modern gets it right. STIX TWO gets it wrong. The results are appearing in production. The Temml library has an open issue that is the direct result of this misalignment.

@tiroj
Copy link
Contributor

tiroj commented Jun 18, 2024

Noted for fix.

@ronkok ronkok changed the title Big (unary) operators are at the wrong vertical alignment Big (N-nary) operators are at the wrong vertical alignment Jun 19, 2024
@ronkok
Copy link
Author

ronkok commented Jun 19, 2024

I've done some more investigation. Below is a list of characters that all have this problem.

LaTeX function Character Code Point
\bigwedge U+22C0
\bigvee U+22C1
\bigcap U+22C2
\bigcup U+22C3
\bigodot U+2A00
\bigoplus U+2A01
\bigotimes U+2A02
\bigcupdot U+2A03
\bigcupplus U+2A04
\bigsqcap U+2A05
\bigsqcup U+2A06
\bigdoublevee U+2A07
\bigdoublewedge U+2A08
\bigtimes U+2A09

The integration symbols and the summation symbol all look good.

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

2 participants