> From: Peter T. Daniels [mailto:grammatim@...]





> The subsystem it's part of is not considered a priority either by MS or

> by software manual writers.

Considering that 10 years ago or more the equation field was superceded by an dedicated equation-editor component better suited for entering mathematical equations (which is what the equation field was intended for), that's probably a reasonable conclusion.

> > > > done using \o() in an "Eq" (equation) field. For instance, I've

> entered

> > > the following text element into my Rich Text message (not sure how

> this

> > > will show up in your mail client) using the field code {eq \o(a,/)}.

> > >

> > > Something like that.

> >

> > *That*, not something like that.

>

> No, because simply typing that string of characters (even if that's

> exactly how it appears on screen, which because of the location of the

> space I don't think it is) doesn't produce an equation.

I did refer to it as a field code, not a string.

> > If you want to work with transliterations or a variety of the world's

> writing systems, and would like it to work in a useful variety of apps,

> you should be using Windows.

>

> Word2001 appears to the user identical to Word2000 (and the books about

> Word2000 apply perfectly to Word2001).

Common books about apps like Word tend not to say much about writing-system support, as we all know. The two are not the same; as is generally true of business apps for the Mac, Word 2001 is very limited in terms of its support for different writing systems. The story is very different on Windows.

> I usually use FrameMaker, because its typographic controls are far

> superior to Word's. But for sharing files, I need to use Word.

But FrameMaker also doesn't give you much in the way of support for different writing systems.

> > > > Subscripts and superscripts are implemented in word processors in

> > > various ways...

> >

> > > > Such approaches do not provide true typographic super-/subscripts.

> Look

> > > for true typographic super-/subscripts implemented using OpenType in

> apps

> > > like Adobe InDesign or in future versions of Word.

> > >

> > > I.e., they removed functionality.

> >

> > ?? Who removed what functionality?

>

> Microsoft removed the ability to nest (in this case) vertical

> positioning commands within overstrike commands.

It's still there in Word 2003. (I'll attempt to include a couple of screen shots, but if Yahoo deletes them I’ll resend as attachments.)



field codes:





field results:

> Hey, just because yahoo doesn't work the way you want it to, don't take

> it out on me or Apple!

At what point was I taking out Yahoo’s shortcomings on you or Apple? I don’t think at any point I took out anything on you, and I only made a factual about writing system support that’s available to users on the Mac, which was entirely unrelated to comments I made about Yahoo.







Peter Constable 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]