%%% ====================================================================
%%% @LaTeX-file{
%%% author = "Alan Jeffrey",
%%% version = "0.02",
%%% date = "3 Aug 1993",
%%% time = "20:02:05 BST",
%%% filename = "mfgorg.tex",
%%% address = "School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences
%%% University of Sussex
%%% Brighton BN1 9QH
%%% UK",
%%% telephone = "+44 273 606755 x 3238",
%%% FAX = "+44 273 678188",
%%% checksum = "42972 164 683 5612",
%%% email = "
[email protected]",
%%% codetable = "ISO/ASCII",
%%% keywords = "TeX fonts mathematics",
%%% supported = "yes",
%%% abstract = "This is a note on MFG organization",
%%% docstring = "The checksum field above contains a CRC-16
%%% checksum as the first value, followed by the
%%% equivalent of the standard UNIX wc (word
%%% count) utility output of lines, words, and
%%% characters. This is produced by Robert
%%% Solovay's checksum utility.",
%%% package = "stands alone",
%%% dependencies = "none",
%%% }
%%% ====================================================================
\documentstyle{ltugboat}
\title{Note on math font group organization}
\author{Alan Jeffrey}
\address{University of Sussex}
\netaddress{
[email protected]}
\def\rtitlex{MFG discussion document}
\def\midrtitle{{\sl Task 1: Organization\/}}
\setcounter{page}{1}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
This note is based on an electronic mail discussion between
Alan Jeffrey and Justin Ziegler. Our suggested breakdown of tasks for
the math font group (MFG) is:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em Organization\/}: writing papers such as this one, about the
structure and direction of the group.
\item {\em Requirements analysis\/}: looking at the needs and current
practice of mathematical typesetting, and setting (perhaps
unachievable!) goals.
\item {\em Technical studies\/}: individual technical analysis, with
clear conclusions and stating the advantages and disadvantages of
the approaches investigated.
\item {\em Standardization\/}: recording the WG's decisions,
leading towards the proposal of new math font encodings and
related standards.
\item {\em Implementation\/}: designing
software to support the new encodings.
\end{enumerate}
These are only rough suggestions, all better suggestions welcomed!
We might want to break each task down into subtasks.
Organization could include:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Statement of purpose\/}: a one-page document setting out the
WG's aims.
\item {\em Outlining goals\/}: general papers like this one.
\item {\em Setting timetables\/}: completion dates for these
goals.
\end{itemize}
Requirements analysis could include:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Common mathematical usage\/}: what features
are common across different subjects?
\item {\em Specific mathematical
usage\/}: what features are specific to particular
subjects? (For example setting of scripts on roman letters in
chemistry, multiletter identifiers in computer science\ldots)
\item {\em Non-mathematical usage\/}: what is math mode used for other
than for mathematics? (For example, setting computer programs,
fractions, footnote markers, trademark signs\ldots)
\item {\em Compatability\/}: how compatible should a new encoding be with
Knuth's?
\item {\em Extensions\/}: what new symbols and other features
are users crying out for?
\item {\em Non-CM fonts\/}: what are the requirements for users of non-CM
fonts (for example PostScript outline fonts).
\end{itemize}
Technical studies could include:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em The current state of \TeX\/}: what are the good and bad points
of \TeX's current mathematical typesetting?
\item {\em The limitations of \TeX\/}: what restrictions does \TeX\
make to mathematical typesetting? (For example, the math spacing
table in Chapter 18 of \TB\ is hard-wired, Appendix~G of \TB\
overloads many font dimensions\ldots)
\item {\em Prototype implementations\/}: each part of the standard should
be $\alpha$-tested before standardization.
\item {\em Studying requirements\/}: work on problems suggested by the
requirements analysis task.
\end{itemize}
Standardization could include:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Font encodings\/}: this is probably the most important
point!
\item {\em Encoding vectors\/}: naming all the symbols as PostScript
encoding vectors.
\item {\em Font information\/}: any new font dimensions, kerning
information, charlists, and so on.
\item {\em (\La)\TeX\ interface\/}: how the fonts can be used in
(\La)\TeX, for example giving default control sequence names for
each glyph.
\end{itemize}
Implementation could include:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em \slMF\ programs\/}: implementing of the encodings using
character shapes based on \verb|cmmi|, \verb|cmsy| and \verb|cmex|.
\item {\em \TeX\ programs\/}: a replacement for \verb|plain.tex|, and
document styles for using the font encodings with \LaTeX.
\item {\em VPL manipulation tools\/}: to help install Non-CM fonts, we
may need general virtual font manipulators.
\item {\em Benchmarks\/}: equivalents of the \verb|trip.tex|
and \verb|testfont.tex| tests for the new encodings.
\end{itemize}
\makesignature
\end{document}
