Talk:Typographical conventions in mathematical formulae

message: I've added some rudimentary information on American mathematical typography. I wish I could locate Knuth's lecture notes on "Mathematical typography"; I found a PDF of them online one time, but don't remember where.
Please add more information about mathematical typography, and in particular about the parts that are different between American and European style. For example, I'm given to understand that many European journals use upright Latin letters and/or italic Greek letters?
I don't know if this article should turn into "dos and don'ts of math writing," but if it does, I've got plenty. :) --Quuxplusone 22:56, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm European, but I've no idea how European conventions should differ from what's presented as American in the article. (I must confess I've never publshed anything in a European journal, however.) Is there really any difference here? (Well, I say \cdot and you say \times; I say 0,5 and you say 0.5 - so let's call the whole thing off... But other than taht?)--Niels Ø (noe) (talk) 21:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  American and European differences 

message: I noticed the red link "mathematization" joke. Did this exist before?
I think somewhere a bit more should be said about that. E.g. the standard use (almost "meaning") of \epsilon, and also e.g. "x,y" for real variables against "k,m,n,..." for integer variables. (Just ran across the latter). Information on this is quite dispersed; this page and other existing pages (Roman letters used in mathematics) are not featured richly enough on this, imho. — MFH:Talk 17:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  mathematization joke 

message: Although the topics may have some overlap, I think it is worthwhile to distinguish between typographical conventions (how formulae are actually typeset: how the font size of a superscript relates to the main text; when three dots are raised or on the baseline; where thin spaces are inserted; ...) and general conventions in mathematical notation (such as the use of single-letter names for variables, but multi-letter names for specific functions and operators; various uses of super- and subscripts; parentheses; function application; infix|postfix|ambifix operators; ellipses; abuse of notation; ...). In my opinion the latter topic — conventions in mathematical notation — warrants a separate article. LambiamTalk 03:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Point well taken, Lambiam!—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 03:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typographical conventions or notational conventions 

message: I can't find this joke anywhere? What is it? The Roc 1217 06:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathematical Joke 

message: I have tagged the article with , because the recommendations of the American Mathematical Society are totally ignored, although AMS is a major authority for mathematics, and the authorities that are cited are generally not recognized, and even ignored by mathematicians.
I have added the reference of the AMS stye guide to the article, but the article must be totally rewritten to follow this style guide, and to clarify its diffference with other recommendations and other conventions that are used outside mathematics. (As "mathematical" appears in the article title, more emphasis must be given to the conventions that are used in mathematics than to the conventions that are used in other scientific areas.) D.Lazard (talk) 10:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  AMS style guide 

message: This article is tagged for multiple issues for several years. WP:TNT seems the only way for fixing  these issues and some more for which the article is not tagged. Indeed, despite its title, the article contains nothing about typography (except a citation of Knuth), and does not present any commonly used typographical convention (if any exists), as it talks only on mathematical notation. If one removes form the article everything that is WP:OR and/or disputed, everything that remains is more accurately described in Mathematical notation
Therefore, I’ll redirect this article to Mathematical notation. This does not mean that there is no need of an article about typography in mathematics, but, presently, there is more on this subject in the proposed target than in this article. D.Lazard (talk) 09:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Making this article a redirect