Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F) • Hacker News Board

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#201

Post by Skeime » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:09 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #135

dietrichepp wrote: post #10

This is for math. In Latex, you get these symbols with \mathbb{}. They are most commonly used to represent to represent number sets, like the set of all integers Z (from the German), set of all natural numbers N, set of complex numbers C, set of all real numbers R, rationals Q (for “quotient”), set of quaternions H (named after Hamilton), or an unknown set F (for “field”). This explains why many of the letters in thi…

> This is for math. Heh. The "tabs vs spaces" debate of mathematical typography is whether these symbols should be used at all in printing, or reserved for actual blackboards. In LaTeX you can have actual boldface letters, so you should write a boldface letter R to represent the real numbers and so on. Using "blackboard bold" in print looks terribly off to some (many?) people.

I strongly disagree that the bold symbols are better, even though they’re what blackboard bold was originally conceived to approximate. The reason: Bold font draws attention (ask a typographer about type color), but usually, the bolder symbols are not the ones requiring that attention. (If I read a text about real analysis, I know that the domains and codomains will be the real numbers, for example.) The blackboard bold versions stick out much less when looking at the greater composition of the page.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#202

Post by hoosieree » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:11 PM UTC

claudiawerner wrote: post #131

mlochbaum wrote: post #90

I'm responsible for this character being supported in Iosevka, JetBrains Mono, 3270, and Cozette, looks like. For arguments I wanted to stick to mathematical convention like f(x) without looking like a regular variable. While the lowercase 𝕩 (subject role) is more common, uppercase makes it a function and is useful in functional programming. More visibility for the character is helpful if it means wider font support…

That's funny; I immediately thought of BQN when I saw this character pop up on HN :)

Haha, same here. I think my brain actually translated the title to "Unicode Character (right argument as a function)".

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#203

Post by yreg » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:14 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #167

These tweets by @SawyerMerritt seem to have been the "inspiration" for X's logo: https://twitter.com/SawyerMerritt/status/1683150433806692352 Correction to my previous reply: @ajtourville designed the thicker X logo below for our (now discontinued) @OfficialXPod. The thicker logo was inspired by a font he found online (bottom right). I created the video above using the font logo, adding a glow and little lines in the…

So what, it's still a logo design.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#204

Post by treve » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:14 PM UTC

NoNotTheDuo wrote: post #172

dietrichepp wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bird is a lot more recognizable, no? Maybe even beautiful?

Not only the bird, but all of the associated verbiage. For example, Tweet and Retweet. Do those go away after changing the name and logo?

I imagine the former will become xcrete.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#205

Post by mlochbaum » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:17 PM UTC

mlochbaum wrote: post #90

I'm responsible for this character being supported in Iosevka, JetBrains Mono, 3270, and Cozette, looks like. For arguments I wanted to stick to mathematical convention like f(x) without looking like a regular variable. While the lowercase 𝕩 (subject role) is more common, uppercase makes it a function and is useful in functional programming. More visibility for the character is helpful if it means wider font support…

Misremembered about Iosevka: I requested support for a few other BQN characters after noticing it already had the double-struck ones (https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka/issues/870). The other three were requests or contributions (drew 3270's 𝕏 myself!) explicitly in connection with BQN.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#206

Post by dundarious » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:19 PM UTC

evan_ wrote: post #170

quietbritishjim wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you'll notice that the scratch in the background doesn't reach the X What does this mean? I've tried finding various images of the X logo on news sites and twitter.com itself and I don't see anything resembling a "scratch in the background" but maybe I'm just missing something obvious.

This tweet has the graphic it’s talking about, and explains better than the referenced article: https://twitter.com/keewa/status/1683378941732728832?s=20

That mockup appears to have been created by @ch1w33th3d0g -- I haven't seen any official X version of https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1682970592159358976/phot.... So there's no point in making complaints about laziness from Musk in this case.

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#207

Post by enriquto » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:25 PM UTC

Skeime wrote: post #201

enriquto wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is for math. Heh. The "tabs vs spaces" debate of mathematical typography is whether these symbols should be used at all in printing, or reserved for actual blackboards. In LaTeX you can have actual boldface letters, so you should write a boldface letter R to represent the real numbers and so on. Using "blackboard bold" in print looks terribly off to some (many?) people.

I strongly disagree that the bold symbols are better, even though they’re what blackboard bold was originally conceived to approximate. The reason: Bold font draws attention (ask a typographer about type color), but usually, the bolder symbols are not the ones requiring that attention. (If I read a text about real analysis, I know that the domains and codomains will be the real numbers, for example.) The blackboard b…

I respect your opinion, and agree that with some particularly "thin" fonts (most notably, Computer Modern and its variants), the associated bold symbols are too exaggerated and produce and ugly effect.

But there is certainly some dependency on the font. For example, the Baskerville used by the Publications de l'IHÉS is a much thicker font, and the bold letters flow very naturally. Look for example here

http://www.numdam.org/item/PMIHES/

The publications in the sixties and seventies, which are scanned, are very beautiful and the bold letters mix smoothly in the text. You cannot see them "from far away" as happens with Computer Modern.

Curiously, the modern pdfs look slightly different, with apparently thinner fonts. This may be an effect of printing, that smears the ink a bit and produces slightly thicker type?

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#208

Post by yreg » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:26 PM UTC

jonas-w wrote: post #99

mkl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? When I type https://xn--971h.com in it doesn't work, but clicking the link in your comment does because HN has made the href x.com. The browser converts 𝕏.com to x.com before going there too. Moreover, X and 𝕏 are treated as equivalent characters in this context, so whois 𝕏.com looks up x.com, and 𝕏.com's punycode encoding is x.com: https://www.whatsmydns.net/idn-punycode-converter?q=%F0%9D%9... who…

HN automatically converts these urls to punycode, maybe this is a bug and it automatically converts everything to punycode even though it doesn't make sense?

It's unrelated to HN. Copy pasting 𝕏.com into the address bar still leads to x.com

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#209

Post by yreg » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:26 PM UTC

ricardo81 wrote: post #106

jonas-w wrote: post #8

You can also access x.com when using the Unicode Character https://xn--971h.com (𝕏.com)

$ curl -i ' https://xn--971h.com ' curl: (6) Could not resolve host: xn--971h.com

    $ curl 𝕏.com
    
    400 Bad Request
    
    400 Bad Request
    cloudflare

Re: Unicode Character “𝕏” (U+1D54F)

#210

Post by account42 » Mon, Jul 24, 2023, 3:30 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #135

dietrichepp wrote: post #10

This is for math. In Latex, you get these symbols with \mathbb{}. They are most commonly used to represent to represent number sets, like the set of all integers Z (from the German), set of all natural numbers N, set of complex numbers C, set of all real numbers R, rationals Q (for “quotient”), set of quaternions H (named after Hamilton), or an unknown set F (for “field”). This explains why many of the letters in thi…

> This is for math. Heh. The "tabs vs spaces" debate of mathematical typography is whether these symbols should be used at all in printing, or reserved for actual blackboards. In LaTeX you can have actual boldface letters, so you should write a boldface letter R to represent the real numbers and so on. Using "blackboard bold" in print looks terribly off to some (many?) people.

Then there's always that one prof that uses both on the blackboard. Also Fraktur. Also bold Fraktur.