Talk:Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols

Letters showing up

edit

has no one noticed the fact that none of the letters shown up??? --AeomMai 23:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

You need to have the correct fonts installed. porges(talk) 03:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Commercial at

edit

dose anyone know what is the name in maths of (@) IS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeyjomanco (talkcontribs) 18:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

The "at sign" is typographically known as commat, as in "commercial at". A few years ago, it was assigned a morse code symbol, the first change in morse in a veryh long time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.203.198.236 (talk) 08:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ampersat 82.47.159.6 (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Incorrect values for ℛ (U+211B SCRIPT CAPITAL R), etc

edit

This article, as it currently exists, is not correct. It shows a script capital R in this unicode block (U+1D400 ... U+1D7FF), but there is no script capital R here. Instead, unicode has a script capital R elsewhere (at U+211B). The same is true for a variety of other characters (looking at Unicode code chart U1D400 (PDF), which is currently an external link but should be a reference, it looks like Swiss cheese). If we want to stick with presenting these characters by Unicode block, we should just take out all those characters. If we want to keep together related characters, we need to get rid of the numbers (or come up with some presentation which can show the numbers, which might be in a different block, somehow). Kingdon (talk) 18:21, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Code point U+1D4AD 𝒭 <reserved-1D4AD> (is not assigned). The linked Unicode page (U1D400.pdf) says on page 7: <reserved>, meaning: not assigned (not a character). Then it refers specifically to {U+211B SCRIPT CAPITAL R (&realine;, &Rscr;). So the facts Kingdon writes are correct.
But I don't understand the bigness of the problem. Anyone can change the chart here. See this edit. Go ahead if you like. And if it becomes Swiss cheese -- if its Unicode, it'll be OK. -DePiep (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
Well, I trust you agree that having wrong information is a problem (I won't quibble about what size problem). I have fixed it as you suggest, by blanking the characters which aren't in this block (and I also removed the numbers at the top of the plain greek letter columns, as the plain characters are not in order). This means that we don't have any pointer to where characters such as ℛ actually are, but since I'm not thinking of a really obvious way to put such a pointer in, I'm not going to worry about that for now. Kingdon (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
It would probably be nice to show what the numbers are, since these missing characters are a lot harder to find than the originals! Also it was my mistake initially to not realize that there were "holes" in the encoding, I was the one who put the numbers in the columns originally. Also some explanation as to why Unicode thought it was a bad idea to just make the "hole" print the glyph? They seem to allow duplicate glyphs lots of other places, so why not here? unsigned
Unicode tries to avoid duplicates at great cost. In regular text, there is no difference for Unicode between roman or scripted, that's a font-style, and a higher level protocol than Unicode. The ones that are not here, were put in elsewhere earlier for more basic (common) mathematical use. Only versions later they had to admit that in maths there is a different meaning between script-A and italic-A, so these letters are different by style and had to be added. I think letterpickers search by "General category=Symbol, math", or have made tjheir own combination list.
I've added a note about the block Letterlike symbols. Over all the charts we have in Category:Unicode chart templates, I have seen little use of such pointers yet. Unicode has them in the descriptive list, not the chart. Maybe flesh out in the overview page Mathematical operators and symbols in Unicode? -DePiep (talk) 02:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Testing the table with unicode2 template

edit

As an experiment I have wrapped all the &x1DXXX characters in the table below in the experimental {{unicode2}} template which tries to select an appropriate font to display the characters with (at present Code2001, Symbola, Segoe UI Symbol and Cambria Math). For me, I can now see all the characters where before I could just saw little square boxes, and so it is a big improvement; but I would like to know whether it is an improvement or not for other editors, and whether people think it is useful to have such a template even though it will only work if readers have downloaded an appropriate font. BabelStone (talk) 23:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

normal bold italic bold
italic
script bold
script
fraktur double-
struck
bold
fraktur
sans-
serif
sans-
serif
bold
sans-
serif
italic
sans-
serif
bold
italic
mono-
space
000411D4001D4341D4681D49C1D4D01D5041D5381D56C1D5A01D5D41D6081D63C1D670
A𝐀𝐴𝑨𝒜𝓐𝔄𝔸𝕬𝖠𝗔𝘈𝘼𝙰
B𝐁𝐵𝑩𝓑𝔅𝔹𝕭𝖡𝗕𝘉𝘽𝙱
C𝐂𝐶𝑪𝒞𝓒𝕮𝖢𝗖𝘊𝘾𝙲
D𝐃𝐷𝑫𝒟𝓓𝔇𝔻𝕯𝖣𝗗𝘋𝘿𝙳
E𝐄𝐸𝑬𝓔𝔈𝔼𝕰𝖤𝗘𝘌𝙀𝙴
F𝐅𝐹𝑭𝓕𝔉𝔽𝕱𝖥𝗙𝘍𝙁𝙵
G𝐆𝐺𝑮𝒢𝓖𝔊𝔾𝕲𝖦𝗚𝘎𝙂𝙶
H𝐇𝐻𝑯𝓗𝕳𝖧𝗛𝘏𝙃𝙷
I𝐈𝐼𝑰𝓘𝕀𝕴𝖨𝗜𝘐𝙄𝙸
J𝐉𝐽𝑱𝒥𝓙𝔍𝕁𝕵𝖩𝗝𝘑𝙅𝙹
K𝐊𝐾𝑲𝒦𝓚𝔎𝕂𝕶𝖪𝗞𝘒𝙆𝙺
L𝐋𝐿𝑳𝓛𝔏𝕃𝕷𝖫𝗟𝘓𝙇𝙻
M𝐌𝑀𝑴𝓜𝔐𝕄𝕸𝖬𝗠𝘔𝙈𝙼
N𝐍𝑁𝑵𝒩𝓝𝔑𝕹𝖭𝗡𝘕𝙉𝙽
O𝐎𝑂𝑶𝒪𝓞𝔒𝕆𝕺𝖮𝗢𝘖𝙊𝙾
P𝐏𝑃𝑷𝒫𝓟𝔓𝕻𝖯𝗣𝘗𝙋𝙿
Q𝐐𝑄𝑸𝒬𝓠𝔔𝕼𝖰𝗤𝘘𝙌𝚀
R𝐑𝑅𝑹𝓡𝕽𝖱𝗥𝘙𝙍𝚁
S𝐒𝑆𝑺𝒮𝓢𝔖𝕊𝕾𝖲𝗦𝘚𝙎𝚂
T𝐓𝑇𝑻𝒯𝓣𝔗𝕋𝕿𝖳𝗧𝘛𝙏𝚃
U𝐔𝑈𝑼𝒰𝓤𝔘𝕌𝖀𝖴𝗨𝘜𝙐𝚄
V𝐕𝑉𝑽𝒱𝓥𝔙𝕍𝖁𝖵𝗩𝘝𝙑𝚅
W𝐖𝑊𝑾𝒲𝓦𝔚𝕎𝖂𝖶𝗪𝘞𝙒𝚆
X𝐗𝑋𝑿𝒳𝓧𝔛𝕏𝖃𝖷𝗫𝘟𝙓𝚇
Y𝐘𝑌𝒀𝒴𝓨𝔜𝕐𝖄𝖸𝗬𝘠𝙔𝚈
Z𝐙𝑍𝒁𝒵𝓩𝖅𝖹𝗭𝘡𝙕𝚉
000611D41A1D44E1D4821D4B61D4EA1D51E1D5521D5861D5BA1D5EE1D6221D6561D68A
a𝐚𝑎𝒂𝒶𝓪𝔞𝕒𝖆𝖺𝗮𝘢𝙖𝚊
b𝐛𝑏𝒃𝒷𝓫𝔟𝕓𝖇𝖻𝗯𝘣𝙗𝚋
c𝐜𝑐𝒄𝒸𝓬𝔠𝕔𝖈𝖼𝗰𝘤𝙘𝚌
d𝐝𝑑𝒅𝒹𝓭𝔡𝕕𝖉𝖽𝗱𝘥𝙙𝚍
e𝐞𝑒𝒆𝓮𝔢𝕖𝖊𝖾𝗲𝘦𝙚𝚎
f𝐟𝑓𝒇𝒻𝓯𝔣𝕗𝖋𝖿𝗳𝘧𝙛𝚏
g𝐠𝑔𝒈𝓰𝔤𝕘𝖌𝗀𝗴𝘨𝙜𝚐
h𝐡𝒉𝒽𝓱𝔥𝕙𝖍𝗁𝗵𝘩𝙝𝚑
i𝐢𝑖𝒊𝒾𝓲𝔦𝕚𝖎𝗂𝗶𝘪𝙞𝚒
j𝐣𝑗𝒋𝒿𝓳𝔧𝕛𝖏𝗃𝗷𝘫𝙟𝚓
k𝐤𝑘𝒌𝓀𝓴𝔨𝕜𝖐𝗄𝗸𝘬𝙠𝚔
l𝐥𝑙𝒍𝓁𝓵𝔩𝕝𝖑𝗅𝗹𝘭𝙡𝚕
m𝐦𝑚𝒎𝓂𝓶𝔪𝕞𝖒𝗆𝗺𝘮𝙢𝚖
n𝐧𝑛𝒏𝓃𝓷𝔫𝕟𝖓𝗇𝗻𝘯𝙣𝚗
o𝐨𝑜𝒐𝓸𝔬𝕠𝖔𝗈𝗼𝘰𝙤𝚘
p𝐩𝑝𝒑𝓅𝓹𝔭𝕡𝖕𝗉𝗽𝘱𝙥𝚙
q𝐪𝑞𝒒𝓆𝓺𝔮𝕢𝖖𝗊𝗾𝘲𝙦𝚚
r𝐫𝑟𝒓𝓇𝓻𝔯𝕣𝖗𝗋𝗿𝘳𝙧𝚛
s𝐬𝑠𝒔𝓈𝓼𝔰𝕤𝖘𝗌𝘀𝘴𝙨𝚜
t𝐭𝑡𝒕𝓉𝓽𝔱𝕥𝖙𝗍𝘁𝘵𝙩𝚝
u𝐮𝑢𝒖𝓊𝓾𝔲𝕦𝖚𝗎𝘂𝘶𝙪𝚞
v𝐯𝑣𝒗𝓋𝓿𝔳𝕧𝖛𝗏𝘃𝘷𝙫𝚟
w𝐰𝑤𝒘𝓌𝔀𝔴𝕨𝖜𝗐𝘄𝘸𝙬𝚠
x𝐱𝑥𝒙𝓍𝔁𝔵𝕩𝖝𝗑𝘅𝘹𝙭𝚡
y𝐲𝑦𝒚𝓎𝔂𝔶𝕪𝖞𝗒𝘆𝘺𝙮𝚢
z𝐳𝑧𝒛𝓏𝔃𝔷𝕫𝖟𝗓𝘇𝘻𝙯𝚣
001311D6A4
ı𝚤
00237
ȷ𝚥
Compare using template {{unicode}} (not {{unicode2}}){{:}}
normal bold italic bold
italic
script bold
script
fraktur double-
struck
bold
fraktur
sans-
serif
sans-
serif
bold
sans-
serif
italic
sans-
serif
bold
italic
mono-
space
000411D4001D4341D4681D49C1D4D01D5041D5381D56C1D5A01D5D41D6081D63C1D670
A𝐀𝐴𝑨𝒜𝓐𝔄𝔸𝕬𝖠𝗔𝘈𝘼𝙰
B𝐁𝐵𝑩𝓑𝔅𝔹𝕭𝖡𝗕𝘉𝘽𝙱

Discussion on testing

edit
Why not fix the span "Unicode" so the older template can be used? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spitzak (talkcontribs)
There was talk Showing_Unicode (and subthread Template_with_double_showing. (started here). Main line: {{unicode2}} is a trial into using different fonts for usage in Supplementary planes (=not BMP). Probably unfeasible, since the user (a reader) needs to download good fonts on their side. Should we end up definitely with "unicode" (not -2), indeed we can use the span. -DePiep (talk) 03:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
re BabelStone: I have not installed the extra fonts. In Firefox 3.6 I see everything, in Safari I see only thhe pink ones good. The regular ones are question mark -boxes each. -DePiep (talk) 03:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
On an older Linux (SUSE 11) with Firefox 4.0 I see a lot of the characters. I see all pink entries, and all columns *except* the script, bold script, fraktur, and bold fraktur. The templates make no differnce to what characters are seen. On another Linux machinge with Ubuntu (not the latest) I see all characters in all cases.Spitzak (talk) 05:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
That's interesting. For the record, on both my Windows XP and Windows Vista PCs (which both have Code2001 and Symbola installed) using my prefered browser of IE8 I can only see the pink-background characters in the table on the article page and the test table using {{unicode}}, but I can see all characters in the test table using {{unicode2}}. Testing under Windows XP with three different browsers I get the following results:
  • IE8 : plain table and {{unicode}} table -- pink characters only; {{unicode2}} table -- all characters displayed OK.
  • Firefox 3.0.17 : plain table, {{unicode}} table, and {{unicode2}} table -- all characters displayed OK in all cases.
  • Chrome 6.0.472.63 : plain table, {{unicode}} table, and {{unicode2}} table -- all characters displayed OK in all cases.
In all cases applying the {{unicode2}} template does not seem to have any adverse effect, and may be beneficial to readers using Internet Explorer; but it also suggests that forcing a particular font using the {{unicode2}} template may not be necessary for users of browsers other than Internet Explorer. BabelStone (talk) 12:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Firefox 3.? on Ubuntu displays all characters. Nothing, unicode, and unicode2 make no difference.Spitzak (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Chrome on Ubuntu for me however is missing the sans-serif bold, italic, and bold italic columns. Again nothing, unicode, and unicode2 make no difference.Spitzak (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Safari 5.0.1 on OS/X 10.5.8 only displays the BMP (first) column and the pink entries. The templates make no differenceSpitzak (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
My feeling is that any template should detect IE and only fix it, as it is doing nothing on the other machines. I would guess if there actually was a font with the given names installed it would select that different font, which really is not nice to the user since it would change the appearance with no benefit.Spitzak (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Rho and Theta-symbol in Maths sans-serif bold

edit

I edited this article because I was seeing the Maths sans bold rho and the Maths sans bold theta-symbol the wrong way round, but BabelStone reverted my edit as he is seeing them the right way round. Having checked on my wife's laptop, it would seem that Mac and Windows seem to show these four characters differently:

So which of us is right? :D — OwenBlacker (talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 17:19, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

The official reference is https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1D400.pdf DRMcCreedy (talk) 19:51, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I am seeing them the right way round on Windows 10 using Cambria Math, but I reverted your edit because I checked the underlying character codes used on the page, and they are correct and match the character codes and character names defined in the Unicode Standard. Must be a bug in an old version of Cambria Math, although I did a quick search and did not find any related bug report for the font. BabelStone (talk) 21:50, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Move discussion in progress

edit

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Unicode block which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. RMCD bot 22:20, 1 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Inaccessibility when used as substitute for formatting

edit

An additional section on the page could be valuable to discuss the impact of the popularity of these symbols as a substitute for formatting (bold, italic, otherwise) in environments that don't have native inclusion of that formatting. With this misuse comes accessibility problems between screen readers literally interpreting characters and lack of support on (usually mobile) devices. I don't have immediately available references or familiarity with Unicode recommendations like mentioned about markup in the current article.

Sire TRM (talk) 03:26, 9 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

+1!
Here’s a blog post with a video demo of the practical effect in some screen reader that seems to be roughly tuned to reading out equations. I have found that in Apple’s current VoiceOver screen reader, these are just omitted with no indication they’re there (I am not a regular user). Michael Z. 17:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add "base" value?

edit

Currently, the Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols#Latin letters tables starts:

Serif Sans-serif Script (or Calligraphy) Fraktur Mono-
space
Double-
struck
Normal Bold Italic Bold
italic
Normal Bold Italic Bold
italic
Normal Bold Normal Bold Normal Bold
A 𝐀 𝐴 𝑨 𝖠 𝗔 𝘈 𝘼 𝒜 𝓐 𝔄 𝕬 𝙰 𝔸
B 𝐁 𝐵 𝑩 𝖡 𝗕 𝘉 𝘽 𝓑 𝔅 𝕭 𝙱 𝔹
C 𝐂 𝐶 𝑪 𝖢 𝗖 𝘊 𝘾 𝒞 𝓒 𝕮 𝙲
...

Since the unicode values are buried in the tooltips, I'd like to add a row at the top with the "base values" to which you can add the values in a new first "offset" column to get the Unicode value for most of the table (the ones that are not exceptions), like this:

Serif Sans-serif Script (or Calligraphy) Fraktur Mono-
space
Double-
struck
Normal Bold Italic Bold
italic
Normal Bold Italic Bold
italic
Normal Bold Normal Bold Normal Bold
U+ 0041 1D400 1D434 1D468 1D5A0 1D5D4 1D608 1D63C 1D49C 1D4D0 1D504 1D56C 1D670 1D538
0 A 𝐀 𝐴 𝑨 𝖠 𝗔 𝘈 𝘼 𝒜 𝓐 𝔄 𝕬 𝙰 𝔸
1 B 𝐁 𝐵 𝑩 𝖡 𝗕 𝘉 𝘽 𝓑 𝔅 𝕭 𝙱 𝔹
2 C 𝐂 𝐶 𝑪 𝖢 𝗖 𝘊 𝘾 𝒞 𝓒 𝕮 𝙲
...

This is pretty standard for such tables here and elsewhere. Thoughts? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 11:51, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

 Done —[AlanM1(talk)]— 15:38, 5 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Double-struck Greek letters

edit

I'd just like to alert the creators to the fact that there exist a few double-struck Greek letters: ℼℽℾℿ⅀ with codes 213c,213d,213e,213f,2140. I think the article should at least mention them if not showcase them in one of the tables. Vpprof (talk) 01:02, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

They seem like valid additions to the Greek letters and symbols tables. Go ahead and add a column in those tables for them if you like. DRMcCreedy (talk) 02:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
In addition, there appears to exist five oddball latin characters in doublestruck form (one majiscule, four miniscule), present at Unicode codepoints 0000214𝜂 ⟦5≤𝜂≤9⟧ since U‑ver 3٫2: ⅅⅆⅇⅈⅉ. Going by that website, there currently exist a total of seventeen ‘doublestruck’ characters availed that do not have ‹Mathematical› appended to the name: the five stylized latin ones just listed, four Greek ones plus iterative summation operator (since ver≼ 4٫1), and seven non‑stylized capital latin letters corresponding to those with pink background in the rightmost column in the Wiki article's ‹Latin letters› table (since ver1٫1⁏ used primarily for designating the corresponding commonplace well‐defined infinite sets), with heretofore ❛stylized❜ ≘ ⟮bold ⩖ italic⟯ i.e. ⟮¬normal⟯ within its designated form of the evidently six forms extant for mathematical letters. I am guessing that there are other characters consistent with greek/latin/miscellaneous representations identified in the article, besides the few just mentioned of the blackboardbold form, that are not listed on the Wiki due in part or wholly to their codepoints' lying outside the regular codepoint range and in part to its original Unicode name—likely not in the more default ‘serif’ or ‘sans‑ຯ’ forms but aligning instead to one of the other three that have some pinks (such as normal∘⟮calligraphy ⩕ Fraktur⟯). 2601:204:C580:2290:0:0:0:F0A8 (talk) 03:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

"𝕏" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit

The redirect 𝕏 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 16 § 𝕏 until a consensus is reached. Formigable (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

What are the actual rules for whether the first columns have serifs?

edit

On my machine the Bold Italic Bold-Italic columns do not have serifs, which seems pretty useless. Editing the source to select the font (which works for the first column to make it have serifs) does not fix it either. It seems these letters in the fallback fonts just don't have serifs... Anybody know what is going on, and whether or not my system is obeying the Unicode spec? Spitzak (talk) 18:00, 20 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Certainly a font issue. Try installing Cambria, Cambria Math, or Segoe UI Symbol which all render with serifs. (I'm on a Windows machine so that might make a difference.) DRMcCreedy (talk) 00:22, 21 April 2026 (UTC)Reply
I mostly want to fix the text which describes this in a very confusing way, wanted to make sure that there was no intention for those columns to every not have serifs Spitzak (talk) 02:07, 21 April 2026 (UTC)Reply