4 ms·

Funny. Coming from a non-math background, having only one symbol to deal with feels less confusing than switching around symbols based on the medium it happens

Funny. Coming from a non-math background, having only one symbol to deal with feels less confusing than switching around symbols based on the medium it happens to be written on. Did one of the symbols come "first"?

enriquto 3y ago
Here you have the whole history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold Summary: boldface came first, in print, and was widely used. Much later, some mathematicians started to write blackboard bold on blackboards (because actual bold would be very untoward to write on a blackboard). Then, the usage was backported to print. I find it ugly, a sort of breaking "suspension of disbelief", I don't know how to explain why. Some sort of "anachronistic" feeling, like watching a movie about the roman empire and some soldiers wear watches. EDIT: as for having "different symbols", this is not the case. They are exactly the same symbol, with different faces. Like when you write the letters "a" or "g" very different on a blackboard as they appear on print.
- dietrichepp 3y ago
  It sounds similar to the division between “math” and “maths”. It looks wrong depending on where you grew up.
  - dataflow 3y ago
    We can compromise by switching to mathematic.
    - dietrichepp 3y ago
      I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical.
      - BobMackay 3y ago
        I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical!
        bamfly 3y ago
        Seems like you've got a solid math grounding. If you're looking to expand on your history knowledge, I'd recommend taking a look at Creasy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifteen_Decisive_Battles_of_the_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifteen_Decisive_Battles_o...
        chungy 3y ago
        They were spoofing Modern Major General.
        bamfly 3y ago
        So was I :-)
    - irrational 3y ago
      Don’t you mean mathematics?
- catiopatio 3y ago
  It’s a useful convention; I’m not sure why you dislike it other than some invalid conception of purity.
  - enriquto 3y ago
    Maybe because my favorite math books do not use this convention, but another equally valid and useful convention: regular boldface.
    - catiopatio 3y ago
      The point isn’t to be “right” — whatever you define that as. The point is to be understood. Use blackboard bold when it’s what people are most familiar with and will engender the least confusion. You call this the “tabs vs spaces” debate, but I’ve literally never heard anyone advocate your position until you did, just now.
      - enriquto 3y ago
        > I’ve literally never heard anyone advocate your position until you did, just now Many mathematicians concerned by typography use real boldface. For example: Terence Tao's blog, Donald Knuth, Paul Halmos (author of "how to write mathematics"), and the famous journal "Publications Mathématiques de l'IHÉS" which is the undisputed gold standard in mathematical typography. They use real boldface for the number sets N, Z, Q, T, R, C. I've never seen a boldface R to mean a set different than the real numbers.
        tel 3y ago
        People use both, for reasons of tradition, ergonomics, practicality, available toolset. Boldface is obviously common in places where BB is unavailable, more restrictive, more difficult. Web publishing is a great example. BB is common, in my experience, in hand-written text where bold isn't really an option. It is, to my tradition, the most common and recognizable way to indicate the most common field sets and also generally is a good stand-in for any "large category" of interest. Bold is used intermittently in my experience, probably due to its inability to be hand-written. To me, it tends to mean "vector" or "matrix" much more than set. In hand-written forms, I sometimes see "arrow hats" instead, especially for vectors.
- skoob 3y ago
  That's pretty typical for how typography develops. Majuscule and miniscule letters were just two different styles of writing the same letter. But eventually, people started using majuscule (i.e uppercase) letters to give emphasis to the beginning of sentences or certain words, like names. Italic typefaces were created by Italian type designers to mimic the cursive handwriting of the time. They weren't meant to be mixed with roman style typefaces. However, typesetters who had access to both roman and italic fonts started to use italic for emphasis when typesetting texts in roman type. And of course blackletter is also just a style that originally tried to mimic earlier handwriting.
paulddraper 3y ago
> having only one symbol to deal with feels less confusing than switching around symbols based on the medium it happens to be written on See: the entire Latin alphabet. Sans-serif symbols for screens, serif symbols for print.
- folkrav 3y ago
  Fair

enriquto 3y ago

Here you have the whole history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboard_bold Summary: boldface came first, in print, and was widely used. Much later, some mathematicians started to write blackboard bold on blackboards (because actual bold would be very untoward to write on a blackboard). Then, the usage was backported to print. I find it ugly, a sort of breaking "suspension of disbelief", I don't know how to explain why. Some sort of "anachronistic" feeling, like watching a movie about the roman empire and some soldiers wear watches. EDIT: as for having "different symbols", this is not the case. They are exactly the same symbol, with different faces. Like when you write the letters "a" or "g" very different on a blackboard as they appear on print.

dietrichepp 3y ago
It sounds similar to the division between “math” and “maths”. It looks wrong depending on where you grew up.
- dataflow 3y ago
  We can compromise by switching to mathematic.
  - dietrichepp 3y ago
    I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical.
    - BobMackay 3y ago
      I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical!
      - bamfly 3y ago
        Seems like you've got a solid math grounding. If you're looking to expand on your history knowledge, I'd recommend taking a look at Creasy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifteen_Decisive_Battles_of_the_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifteen_Decisive_Battles_o...
        chungy 3y ago
        They were spoofing Modern Major General.
        bamfly 3y ago
        So was I :-)
  - irrational 3y ago
    Don’t you mean mathematics?
catiopatio 3y ago
It’s a useful convention; I’m not sure why you dislike it other than some invalid conception of purity.
- enriquto 3y ago
  Maybe because my favorite math books do not use this convention, but another equally valid and useful convention: regular boldface.
  - catiopatio 3y ago
    The point isn’t to be “right” — whatever you define that as. The point is to be understood. Use blackboard bold when it’s what people are most familiar with and will engender the least confusion. You call this the “tabs vs spaces” debate, but I’ve literally never heard anyone advocate your position until you did, just now.
    - enriquto 3y ago
      > I’ve literally never heard anyone advocate your position until you did, just now Many mathematicians concerned by typography use real boldface. For example: Terence Tao's blog, Donald Knuth, Paul Halmos (author of "how to write mathematics"), and the famous journal "Publications Mathématiques de l'IHÉS" which is the undisputed gold standard in mathematical typography. They use real boldface for the number sets N, Z, Q, T, R, C. I've never seen a boldface R to mean a set different than the real numbers.
      - tel 3y ago
        People use both, for reasons of tradition, ergonomics, practicality, available toolset. Boldface is obviously common in places where BB is unavailable, more restrictive, more difficult. Web publishing is a great example. BB is common, in my experience, in hand-written text where bold isn't really an option. It is, to my tradition, the most common and recognizable way to indicate the most common field sets and also generally is a good stand-in for any "large category" of interest. Bold is used intermittently in my experience, probably due to its inability to be hand-written. To me, it tends to mean "vector" or "matrix" much more than set. In hand-written forms, I sometimes see "arrow hats" instead, especially for vectors.
skoob 3y ago
That's pretty typical for how typography develops. Majuscule and miniscule letters were just two different styles of writing the same letter. But eventually, people started using majuscule (i.e uppercase) letters to give emphasis to the beginning of sentences or certain words, like names. Italic typefaces were created by Italian type designers to mimic the cursive handwriting of the time. They weren't meant to be mixed with roman style typefaces. However, typesetters who had access to both roman and italic fonts started to use italic for emphasis when typesetting texts in roman type. And of course blackletter is also just a style that originally tried to mimic earlier handwriting.

paulddraper 3y ago

> having only one symbol to deal with feels less confusing than switching around symbols based on the medium it happens to be written on See: the entire Latin alphabet. Sans-serif symbols for screens, serif symbols for print.

folkrav 3y ago
Fair