That makes about a million times more sense
Comment on Velma can't math.
m0stlyharmless@lemmy.zip 1 day agoI suspect it’s an OCR error.
stevedice@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
Comment on Velma can't math.
m0stlyharmless@lemmy.zip 1 day agoI suspect it’s an OCR error.
That makes about a million times more sense
ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 1 day ago
I’m guessing a typesetter was too lazy to add a different-size font and although they knew how to type “√”, didn’t realize “²” is in Unicode too. They added a horizontal line as separate graphics to extend the square root symbol but only realized too late the whole thing is in a fraction: maybe someone reminded them and they misinterpreted the advice, or just decided not to split the text box to put the nominator higher.
vaionko@sopuli.xyz 13 hours ago
Can you even do that “proper” square root with unicode? Or is it always just that single character?
ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 11 hours ago
Unicode isn’t meant to replace all typesetting like LaTeX. For example, I can’t make proper horizontal fractions (unlike ⅝, perhaps) that are normal in my part of the world because that would be too much scope creep.
An imperfect solution is adding
̅ U+0305 COMBINING OVERLINEabove everything. For example, it does not sit at consistent height (√4̅a̅c̅) and Windows renders it incorrectly (centered to the right edge of the character, not its center).This is how I’d render the numerator using Unicode only: 𝑏² ± √4̅𝑎̅𝑐̅
vaionko@sopuli.xyz 3 hours ago
So they had to use something “fancier” line TeX so they must’ve known about suoerscriots and the like