Live data from Hacker News

U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

ionathan.ch

141–150 of 312 posts

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#141

Dislosure: I'm not directly from the fields of the Sciences Of Angles And Ambiguously Crossing Lines nor I've every seen or used this symbol before. However to me it's, pretty evidently, supposed to be a "no right angle" symbol. (A) It's in the math section, (B) it's with angles, (C) the thunderbolt ↯ is commonly used for "not" or more specifically for dis-proof in this area and (D) at least by my 30 s internet searc…

Perpendicular + Unicode combining solidus = ⟂ + / = ⟂̸

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#142
post #89
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes people should be able to do nice things without it getting abused, no? In The Netherlands, in the nicer neighborhoods we have something called a ‘buurtbieb’ aka a ‘neighborhood libraries’, which is a weatherproof cabinet where people can put surplus books that other people in the neighborhood can borrow. Of course you could take all the books or use the cabinet to store candy, but why would you?

Usually called Little Free Libraries in the US. (The name is a little weird, because regular libraries are also free...)

FWIW "Little Free Library" is a trademark and its owners have been aggressive in its defense. I don't know what folks should use as a generic name.

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#143
post #132
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not long ago I found these ≤ U+2264 LESS-THAN OR EQUAL TO ⋜ U+22DC EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN ≥ U+2265 GREATER-THAN OR EQUAL TO ⋝ U+22DD EQUAL TO OR GREATER-THAN or even ⋚ U+22DA LESS-THAN EQUAL TO OR GREATER-THAN ⋛ U+22DB GREATER-THAN EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN

> ⋚ U+22DA LESS-THAN EQUAL TO OR GREATER-THAN > ⋛ U+22DB GREATER-THAN EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN These are very interesting. What would be the use case for these?

Perhaps "has a comparison relation to"? So for any two numbers x and y, x ⋚ y is true, but "square ⋚ pentagon" is false.

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#144

I still don't understand why Unicode has all these obscure symbols but they still haven't added all superscript/subscript numbers and letters https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6638471/why-does-the-uni... To quote a reply from the above StackOverflow thread: "So, they added a snowman with snow AND a snowman without snow , so that the weather forecaster of this world can avoid the dull snowflake , but we will never g…

Should we also have slanted, bold, semi-bold, light and underlined versions of every code point? Versions with/without serifs? For monospaced text? Those are all presentational matters. That we have super/subscripts in Unicode in the first place seems to have been just a hack to help terminal emulator software deal with obsolete encodings like ISO-8859-1: https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2000/00159-ucsterminal.txt

𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝘄𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝙖𝙣𝙙/𝘰𝘳 𝑠𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒔 𝗶𝗻 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗼𝗱𝗲? 𝓘𝓽 𝓼𝓮𝓮𝓶𝓼 𝓈𝑜𝓂𝑒𝑜𝓃𝑒 𝔱𝔥𝔬𝔲𝔤𝔥𝔱 𝖘𝖔!

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unicode superscript and subscript is not intended for mathematical usages [1]. [1] https://unicode.org/faq/ligature_digraph.html#Pf8

That's a cop out. You could equally say that new emojis shouldn't be added because you should use inline images for those. Or RTL markers shouldn't be added because you should use dedicated text styling for that. There are a ton of places that don't support superscript markup.

[deleted]

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#147
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they still haven't added all superscript/subscript numbers and letters That would triple the size of Unicode.

They would just need to add one Unicode modifier for superscript and one for subscript like there is for gender and skin color.

Fair enough, but general formatting codes would overlap with what is already supported in rich-text formats like HTML or LaTeX. Unicode is a standard for encoding characters, it is not supposed to be a rich-text document format itself.

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#148
post #132
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not long ago I found these ≤ U+2264 LESS-THAN OR EQUAL TO ⋜ U+22DC EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN ≥ U+2265 GREATER-THAN OR EQUAL TO ⋝ U+22DD EQUAL TO OR GREATER-THAN or even ⋚ U+22DA LESS-THAN EQUAL TO OR GREATER-THAN ⋛ U+22DB GREATER-THAN EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN

> ⋚ U+22DA LESS-THAN EQUAL TO OR GREATER-THAN > ⋛ U+22DB GREATER-THAN EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN These are very interesting. What would be the use case for these?

When I was learning statistical hypothesis testing, I once wrote notes that looked like "H_0: mu ⋚ a p-value: P(T(X) ⋛ T(a))", although I didn't include the equal-to bar.

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#149

> And the inclusion of “AMS” in the names of the entity collections likewise remained mysterious. Could this be The American Mathematical Society?

Seems plausible, but from the linked stackexchange question: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/640588/what-is-%E2%8...

> It appeared in the entity set ISOAMSA, which, regardless of the name, had no connection with the American Mathematical Society.

Re: U+237C ⍼ Right Angle with Downwards Zigzag Arrow

#150
post #34
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) there's only ~150k unicode values defined. If we assume a signed int for available space, we have 2,147,333,647 of 2,147,483,647 remaining. moreso if the int is unsigned. We're fine. 2) they use values that combine like ligatures to create the variants of values. there isn't a combinatorial explosion because color is a modifier value, and sex, and then the underlying symbol. It's not a unique symbol for each combi…

We can't assume a signed int, as character encodings limit the number of codepoints: "Excluding surrogates and noncharacters leaves 1,111,998 code points available for use." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode#:~:text=Excluding%20su...

Besides the difference between the abstract and unlimited Unicode and the encodings, our current "modern" encodings, UTF-8 and the new UTF-16 are artificially restricted and can be trivially expanded into a huge number of codepoints just by removing those restrictions.
Post reply on HN