Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeDec 18th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexDo other people see these final symbols as identical at [[Serre intersection formula]]? > Given a [[regular scheme]] $X$ and subschemes $Y,Z$ with defining ideal sheaves $\mathcal{I},\mathcal{J}$...

   Do other people see these final symbols as identical at Serre intersection formula?

   Given a regular scheme $X$ and subschemes $Y,Z$ with defining ideal sheaves $\mathcal{I},\mathcal{J}$…

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeDec 18th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexand here?

   and here?

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorAli Caglayan
   • CommentTimeDec 18th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Ali Caglayan
   Format: MarkdownItexThis is to do with the mathcal font being weird. I've brought this up before. For some reason mathcal on nlab is this weird scripty version. It should really be like it is on mathoverflow.

   This is to do with the mathcal font being weird. I’ve brought this up before. For some reason mathcal on nlab is this weird scripty version. It should really be like it is on mathoverflow.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthoratmacen
   • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: atmacen
   Format: TextThey look different for me, and they both display on nLab, but on nForum, the second one is a Unicode box.

   They look different for me, and they both display on nLab, but on nForum, the second one is a Unicode box.
5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexThey look different to me, and each is the same in both places, neither being a unicode box.

   They look different to me, and each is the same in both places, neither being a unicode box.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexFWIW: On my MacBook using Firefox, they display correctly both on the nLab page and here. I tested on Safari and although looking different from here, they are distinct, and readable, in both the Lab and here.

   FWIW: On my MacBook using Firefox, they display correctly both on the nLab page and here. I tested on Safari and although looking different from here, they are distinct, and readable, in both the Lab and here.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexI'm using Chrome. At [MathOverflow](https://mathoverflow.net/q/12236/447) they differ for me.

   I’m using Chrome. At MathOverflow they differ for me.

8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorAli Caglayan
   • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
   • PermaLink
   Author: Ali Caglayan
   Format: MarkdownItexI am using Chrome too, this is probably the problem. If I remember correctly Chrome stopped supporting mathml a while back, so is this really a MathJax problem? In which case Richard could reconfigure it? I am only guessing because MathOverflow uses MathJax aswell if I remember correctly.

   I am using Chrome too, this is probably the problem. If I remember correctly Chrome stopped supporting mathml a while back, so is this really a MathJax problem? In which case Richard could reconfigure it? I am only guessing because MathOverflow uses MathJax aswell if I remember correctly.

9. • CommentRowNumber9.
   • CommentAuthorRichard Williamson
   • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
   • (edited Dec 19th 2018)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Richard Williamson
   Format: MarkdownItex[Here](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/8922/changing-latex-fonts/) is the earlier thread. As in #6 there, there is a significant difference between the way MathJax is being used on MathOverflow and here; MathJax is parsing LaTeX directly on MathOverflow, whilst it is parsing MathML on the nLab. Looking at the HTML source, it looks like the MathML produced has ```<mi>I</mi>```, where the I is already a unicode calligraphic symbol. It might be that if one used ```<mi mathvariant="script">I</mi>``` or something instead, using only an ASCII I, then MathJax would render it correctly. This would involve changing the Itex2MML source, though. For now, I would suggest just to change the page so that the two letters are distinguishable, e.g. by not using mathcal or by using different letters.

   Here is the earlier thread. As in #6 there, there is a significant difference between the way MathJax is being used on MathOverflow and here; MathJax is parsing LaTeX directly on MathOverflow, whilst it is parsing MathML on the nLab.

   Looking at the HTML source, it looks like the MathML produced has <mi>I</mi>, where the I is already a unicode calligraphic symbol. It might be that if one used <mi mathvariant="script">I</mi> or something instead, using only an ASCII I, then MathJax would render it correctly. This would involve changing the Itex2MML source, though. For now, I would suggest just to change the page so that the two letters are distinguishable, e.g. by not using mathcal or by using different letters.

10. • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2018
    • PermaLink
    Author: Tim_Porter
    Format: MarkdownItexFollowing David's comment about Chrome I tried it on my machine and the letters do look similar but the J has a loop on the bottom whilst the I does not. The two letters are not looking the same.

    Following David’s comment about Chrome I tried it on my machine and the letters do look similar but the J has a loop on the bottom whilst the I does not. The two letters are not looking the same.

11. • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2018
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexStrange. They're identical for me.

    Strange. They’re identical for me.