Do ℕ, mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN effectively differ, and is there a “canonical” specification of the naturals? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Using `mathbb` fonts from other packagesmathbb0 and mathbb1 with mathdesign/Utopia?mathbb0 and mathbb1 without affecting mathbbR and mathbbNHow to produce a character like 𝕜 (the nonexisting mathbbk)?mathbb generates strange characters for numbers and greek lettersXeLaTeX, Latin Modern, mathbb and mathcalWhy does mathbbN_0 render the 0 as nvdash?Is there a “new” canonical test for fonts and languages?Is there a blackboard version of Omega (the capital letter)Typesetting a computer-science book with XeLaTeX+biber

How to deal with a team lead who never gives me credit?

When is phishing education going too far?

Models of set theory where not every set can be linearly ordered

Why aren't air breathing engines used as small first stages

What is the longest distance a 13th-level monk can jump while attacking on the same turn?

If Jon Snow became King of the Seven Kingdoms what would his regnal number be?

Were Kohanim forbidden from serving in King David's army?

How do I mention the quality of my school without bragging

Why was the term "discrete" used in discrete logarithm?

Why constant symbols in a language?

Is it true that "carbohydrates are of no use for the basal metabolic need"?

Is above average number of years spent on PhD considered a red flag in future academia or industry positions?

Is it ethical to give a final exam after the professor has quit before teaching the remaining chapters of the course?

Is there a service that would inform me whenever a new direct route is scheduled from a given airport?

Can inflation occur in a positive-sum game currency system such as the Stack Exchange reputation system?

Letter Boxed validator

Why is "Captain Marvel" translated as male in Portugal?

Is the address of a local variable a constexpr?

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?

Right-skewed distribution with mean equals to mode?

What are 'alternative tunings' of a guitar and why would you use them? Doesn't it make it more difficult to play?

What's the difference between `auto x = vector<int>()` and `vector<int> x`?

How do I stop a creek from eroding my steep embankment?

What is this single-engine low-wing propeller plane?



Do ℕ, mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN effectively differ, and is there a “canonical” specification of the naturals?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Using `mathbb` fonts from other packagesmathbb0 and mathbb1 with mathdesign/Utopia?mathbb0 and mathbb1 without affecting mathbbR and mathbbNHow to produce a character like 𝕜 (the nonexisting mathbbk)?mathbb generates strange characters for numbers and greek lettersXeLaTeX, Latin Modern, mathbb and mathcalWhy does mathbbN_0 render the 0 as nvdash?Is there a “new” canonical test for fonts and languages?Is there a blackboard version of Omega (the capital letter)Typesetting a computer-science book with XeLaTeX+biber










9















Continuing https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/a/22167/, as far as I understand, all the four of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN work now, and BbbN is advised against. Is there any reasonably default context (e.g., a self-constructed context that would redefine these macros and symbols wouldn't count) in which some of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN produce different results than some others when using amssymb+unicode-math+xelatex? Compiling the example



documentclassbook
usepackagefontspec
usepackageamssymb
usepackageunicode-math
usepackagemicrotype
setmainfontTeX Gyre Termes
setsansfontTeX Gyre Heros[Scale=0.88]
setmonofontTeX Gyre Cursor
setmathfontTeX Gyre Termes Math
setmathfontAsana Math[
range=setminus,
]
setmathfontXITSMath-Regular[
Extension=.otf,
range="2A3E,
BoldFont=XITSMath-Bold,
]
begindocument
(ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN)
enddocument


with xelatex, e.g., I get visibly indistinguishable letters




ℕℕℕℕ




I cannot distinguish them either when I put them as subscripts or superscripts.



Moreover, is there a consensus in the xe[La]TeX world to name any of these ways as the standard way to denote the set of natural numbers?



(Of course, I leave aside the question whether the zero should belong to this set or not; it could flame up a war here and is up to the author anyway.)










share|improve this question


























    9















    Continuing https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/a/22167/, as far as I understand, all the four of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN work now, and BbbN is advised against. Is there any reasonably default context (e.g., a self-constructed context that would redefine these macros and symbols wouldn't count) in which some of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN produce different results than some others when using amssymb+unicode-math+xelatex? Compiling the example



    documentclassbook
    usepackagefontspec
    usepackageamssymb
    usepackageunicode-math
    usepackagemicrotype
    setmainfontTeX Gyre Termes
    setsansfontTeX Gyre Heros[Scale=0.88]
    setmonofontTeX Gyre Cursor
    setmathfontTeX Gyre Termes Math
    setmathfontAsana Math[
    range=setminus,
    ]
    setmathfontXITSMath-Regular[
    Extension=.otf,
    range="2A3E,
    BoldFont=XITSMath-Bold,
    ]
    begindocument
    (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN)
    enddocument


    with xelatex, e.g., I get visibly indistinguishable letters




    ℕℕℕℕ




    I cannot distinguish them either when I put them as subscripts or superscripts.



    Moreover, is there a consensus in the xe[La]TeX world to name any of these ways as the standard way to denote the set of natural numbers?



    (Of course, I leave aside the question whether the zero should belong to this set or not; it could flame up a war here and is up to the author anyway.)










    share|improve this question
























      9












      9








      9








      Continuing https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/a/22167/, as far as I understand, all the four of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN work now, and BbbN is advised against. Is there any reasonably default context (e.g., a self-constructed context that would redefine these macros and symbols wouldn't count) in which some of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN produce different results than some others when using amssymb+unicode-math+xelatex? Compiling the example



      documentclassbook
      usepackagefontspec
      usepackageamssymb
      usepackageunicode-math
      usepackagemicrotype
      setmainfontTeX Gyre Termes
      setsansfontTeX Gyre Heros[Scale=0.88]
      setmonofontTeX Gyre Cursor
      setmathfontTeX Gyre Termes Math
      setmathfontAsana Math[
      range=setminus,
      ]
      setmathfontXITSMath-Regular[
      Extension=.otf,
      range="2A3E,
      BoldFont=XITSMath-Bold,
      ]
      begindocument
      (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN)
      enddocument


      with xelatex, e.g., I get visibly indistinguishable letters




      ℕℕℕℕ




      I cannot distinguish them either when I put them as subscripts or superscripts.



      Moreover, is there a consensus in the xe[La]TeX world to name any of these ways as the standard way to denote the set of natural numbers?



      (Of course, I leave aside the question whether the zero should belong to this set or not; it could flame up a war here and is up to the author anyway.)










      share|improve this question














      Continuing https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/a/22167/, as far as I understand, all the four of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN work now, and BbbN is advised against. Is there any reasonably default context (e.g., a self-constructed context that would redefine these macros and symbols wouldn't count) in which some of , mathbbN, BbbN, symbbN produce different results than some others when using amssymb+unicode-math+xelatex? Compiling the example



      documentclassbook
      usepackagefontspec
      usepackageamssymb
      usepackageunicode-math
      usepackagemicrotype
      setmainfontTeX Gyre Termes
      setsansfontTeX Gyre Heros[Scale=0.88]
      setmonofontTeX Gyre Cursor
      setmathfontTeX Gyre Termes Math
      setmathfontAsana Math[
      range=setminus,
      ]
      setmathfontXITSMath-Regular[
      Extension=.otf,
      range="2A3E,
      BoldFont=XITSMath-Bold,
      ]
      begindocument
      (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN)
      enddocument


      with xelatex, e.g., I get visibly indistinguishable letters




      ℕℕℕℕ




      I cannot distinguish them either when I put them as subscripts or superscripts.



      Moreover, is there a consensus in the xe[La]TeX world to name any of these ways as the standard way to denote the set of natural numbers?



      (Of course, I leave aside the question whether the zero should belong to this set or not; it could flame up a war here and is up to the author anyway.)







      xetex symbols unicode-math amssymb blackboard






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Apr 11 at 23:54









      user49915user49915

      829122




      829122




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          13














          The difference is mainly historical. BbbN was created for the original amsfonts, pre-LaTeX; it should be considered obsolete now.
          (Oops! @egreg points out in a comment that BbbN has been defined for unicode-math, so I was thinking of BbbN. That surely should be considered obsolete.)
          The original LaTeX equivalent is mathbbN, and should still be reliable.



          symbbN was defined for fonts developed after the blackboard bold alphabet was added to Unicode.



          The symbol itself (which I can't represent because it's not available on the aged laptop I'm using) depends on having a utf-8 capable input device, and is not available for pdflatex, which is still limited to 8-bit input.



          All forms are equivalent, and the one you use depends on which flavor of LaTeX you're using. There may also be some restrictions associated with the publisher, if you're submitting your document for publication.



          This may not give an unambiguous answer to your question, but it should give you some idea of how the development of the blackboard bold fonts and their support affects the decision of which should be used in what circumstances.






          share|improve this answer




















          • 1





            BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

            – egreg
            Apr 12 at 6:24


















          11














          If you modify your file to have



          showoutput
          (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN showlists)


          Then you get



          mathord
          .fam0 ℕ
          mathord
          .fam0 ℕ
          mathord
          .fam0 ℕ
          mathord
          .fam0 ℕ
          ### horizontal mode entered at line 20


          Four identical N, same font and same math class (mathord).



          I would say use if you like Unicode input and symbbN if you prefer ASCII TeX command markup. So they are the preferred forms, but as they are all the same thing it doesn't matter much which you use.



          Of course other font setups may make things differ. In general symxx will give you characters from the same font using the math alphabet ranges, whereas mathxx might do that or might (as in classic tex) use a different font.






          share|improve this answer
































            6














            tl;dr



            It's completely the same.



            Why do those four inputs produce the same output?



            In unicode-math-table.tex we find



            UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n


            Every Unicode code point relevant for math has a name, so that unicode-math can do, in this case, the equivalent of



            Umathchardef`ℕ = "7 "0 "02115


            (the second number could change in case range=bb is used to select a different font for these characters).



            If you add showmathbb to your sample TeX file (after begindocument), you'll get



            > mathbb=long macro:
            ->symbb .


            This almost answers your question. At least we know that



            1. typing or BbbN is the same

            2. typing mathbbN or symbbN is the same

            It only remains to discover what's the relationship between the two cases above. Simple: symbbN does BbbN. Not really by chaining N to Bbb, but something like that (it's more complicated because one can use range=bb to use a different font for blackboard bold letters).



            Now we know that typing



            $ℕ BbbN mathbbN symbbN$


            is exactly the same. The alias name mathbb for symbb is for backwards compatibility with older code.



            Some explanation is in order. unicode-math used to have just mathXX commands. However, it was realized that distinguishing between mathXX and symXX is necessary. The first form is about words used in math, the second form for single characters (and doesn't enforce ligatures if used for more characters in a row); these forms can point to different fonts. Typically, for instance, mathbf will use the boldface text font, whereas symbfx will use mbfx, pointing to U+1D431 in the math font.



            While the distinction is necessary for boldface, in the case of blackboard bold there is no usage of it as a text font, so no distinction is made between mathbb and symbb, by default. You (or a package) might redefine mathbb to do something else (not that I recommend it).



            What's the preferred form?



            I'd avoid BbbN and probably prefer symbb for newer documents, unless it's possible to directly type in .






            share|improve this answer

























            • Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

              – user49915
              Apr 12 at 13:24







            • 1





              @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

              – egreg
              Apr 12 at 13:26











            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "85"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f484425%2fdo-%25e2%2584%2595-mathbbn-bbbn-symbbn-effectively-differ-and-is-there-a-canonical%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes








            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            13














            The difference is mainly historical. BbbN was created for the original amsfonts, pre-LaTeX; it should be considered obsolete now.
            (Oops! @egreg points out in a comment that BbbN has been defined for unicode-math, so I was thinking of BbbN. That surely should be considered obsolete.)
            The original LaTeX equivalent is mathbbN, and should still be reliable.



            symbbN was defined for fonts developed after the blackboard bold alphabet was added to Unicode.



            The symbol itself (which I can't represent because it's not available on the aged laptop I'm using) depends on having a utf-8 capable input device, and is not available for pdflatex, which is still limited to 8-bit input.



            All forms are equivalent, and the one you use depends on which flavor of LaTeX you're using. There may also be some restrictions associated with the publisher, if you're submitting your document for publication.



            This may not give an unambiguous answer to your question, but it should give you some idea of how the development of the blackboard bold fonts and their support affects the decision of which should be used in what circumstances.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 1





              BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

              – egreg
              Apr 12 at 6:24















            13














            The difference is mainly historical. BbbN was created for the original amsfonts, pre-LaTeX; it should be considered obsolete now.
            (Oops! @egreg points out in a comment that BbbN has been defined for unicode-math, so I was thinking of BbbN. That surely should be considered obsolete.)
            The original LaTeX equivalent is mathbbN, and should still be reliable.



            symbbN was defined for fonts developed after the blackboard bold alphabet was added to Unicode.



            The symbol itself (which I can't represent because it's not available on the aged laptop I'm using) depends on having a utf-8 capable input device, and is not available for pdflatex, which is still limited to 8-bit input.



            All forms are equivalent, and the one you use depends on which flavor of LaTeX you're using. There may also be some restrictions associated with the publisher, if you're submitting your document for publication.



            This may not give an unambiguous answer to your question, but it should give you some idea of how the development of the blackboard bold fonts and their support affects the decision of which should be used in what circumstances.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 1





              BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

              – egreg
              Apr 12 at 6:24













            13












            13








            13







            The difference is mainly historical. BbbN was created for the original amsfonts, pre-LaTeX; it should be considered obsolete now.
            (Oops! @egreg points out in a comment that BbbN has been defined for unicode-math, so I was thinking of BbbN. That surely should be considered obsolete.)
            The original LaTeX equivalent is mathbbN, and should still be reliable.



            symbbN was defined for fonts developed after the blackboard bold alphabet was added to Unicode.



            The symbol itself (which I can't represent because it's not available on the aged laptop I'm using) depends on having a utf-8 capable input device, and is not available for pdflatex, which is still limited to 8-bit input.



            All forms are equivalent, and the one you use depends on which flavor of LaTeX you're using. There may also be some restrictions associated with the publisher, if you're submitting your document for publication.



            This may not give an unambiguous answer to your question, but it should give you some idea of how the development of the blackboard bold fonts and their support affects the decision of which should be used in what circumstances.






            share|improve this answer















            The difference is mainly historical. BbbN was created for the original amsfonts, pre-LaTeX; it should be considered obsolete now.
            (Oops! @egreg points out in a comment that BbbN has been defined for unicode-math, so I was thinking of BbbN. That surely should be considered obsolete.)
            The original LaTeX equivalent is mathbbN, and should still be reliable.



            symbbN was defined for fonts developed after the blackboard bold alphabet was added to Unicode.



            The symbol itself (which I can't represent because it's not available on the aged laptop I'm using) depends on having a utf-8 capable input device, and is not available for pdflatex, which is still limited to 8-bit input.



            All forms are equivalent, and the one you use depends on which flavor of LaTeX you're using. There may also be some restrictions associated with the publisher, if you're submitting your document for publication.



            This may not give an unambiguous answer to your question, but it should give you some idea of how the development of the blackboard bold fonts and their support affects the decision of which should be used in what circumstances.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Apr 12 at 17:37

























            answered Apr 12 at 0:15









            barbara beetonbarbara beeton

            70.3k9159382




            70.3k9159382







            • 1





              BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

              – egreg
              Apr 12 at 6:24












            • 1





              BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

              – egreg
              Apr 12 at 6:24







            1




            1





            BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

            – egreg
            Apr 12 at 6:24





            BbbN is a specific command in unicode-math. The command Bbb (with an argument) is obsolete.

            – egreg
            Apr 12 at 6:24











            11














            If you modify your file to have



            showoutput
            (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN showlists)


            Then you get



            mathord
            .fam0 ℕ
            mathord
            .fam0 ℕ
            mathord
            .fam0 ℕ
            mathord
            .fam0 ℕ
            ### horizontal mode entered at line 20


            Four identical N, same font and same math class (mathord).



            I would say use if you like Unicode input and symbbN if you prefer ASCII TeX command markup. So they are the preferred forms, but as they are all the same thing it doesn't matter much which you use.



            Of course other font setups may make things differ. In general symxx will give you characters from the same font using the math alphabet ranges, whereas mathxx might do that or might (as in classic tex) use a different font.






            share|improve this answer





























              11














              If you modify your file to have



              showoutput
              (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN showlists)


              Then you get



              mathord
              .fam0 ℕ
              mathord
              .fam0 ℕ
              mathord
              .fam0 ℕ
              mathord
              .fam0 ℕ
              ### horizontal mode entered at line 20


              Four identical N, same font and same math class (mathord).



              I would say use if you like Unicode input and symbbN if you prefer ASCII TeX command markup. So they are the preferred forms, but as they are all the same thing it doesn't matter much which you use.



              Of course other font setups may make things differ. In general symxx will give you characters from the same font using the math alphabet ranges, whereas mathxx might do that or might (as in classic tex) use a different font.






              share|improve this answer



























                11












                11








                11







                If you modify your file to have



                showoutput
                (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN showlists)


                Then you get



                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                ### horizontal mode entered at line 20


                Four identical N, same font and same math class (mathord).



                I would say use if you like Unicode input and symbbN if you prefer ASCII TeX command markup. So they are the preferred forms, but as they are all the same thing it doesn't matter much which you use.



                Of course other font setups may make things differ. In general symxx will give you characters from the same font using the math alphabet ranges, whereas mathxx might do that or might (as in classic tex) use a different font.






                share|improve this answer















                If you modify your file to have



                showoutput
                (ℕ mathbbN BbbN symbbN showlists)


                Then you get



                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                mathord
                .fam0 ℕ
                ### horizontal mode entered at line 20


                Four identical N, same font and same math class (mathord).



                I would say use if you like Unicode input and symbbN if you prefer ASCII TeX command markup. So they are the preferred forms, but as they are all the same thing it doesn't matter much which you use.



                Of course other font setups may make things differ. In general symxx will give you characters from the same font using the math alphabet ranges, whereas mathxx might do that or might (as in classic tex) use a different font.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 22 hours ago









                Henri Menke

                77.5k8171285




                77.5k8171285










                answered Apr 12 at 0:14









                David CarlisleDavid Carlisle

                499k4111451895




                499k4111451895





















                    6














                    tl;dr



                    It's completely the same.



                    Why do those four inputs produce the same output?



                    In unicode-math-table.tex we find



                    UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n


                    Every Unicode code point relevant for math has a name, so that unicode-math can do, in this case, the equivalent of



                    Umathchardef`ℕ = "7 "0 "02115


                    (the second number could change in case range=bb is used to select a different font for these characters).



                    If you add showmathbb to your sample TeX file (after begindocument), you'll get



                    > mathbb=long macro:
                    ->symbb .


                    This almost answers your question. At least we know that



                    1. typing or BbbN is the same

                    2. typing mathbbN or symbbN is the same

                    It only remains to discover what's the relationship between the two cases above. Simple: symbbN does BbbN. Not really by chaining N to Bbb, but something like that (it's more complicated because one can use range=bb to use a different font for blackboard bold letters).



                    Now we know that typing



                    $ℕ BbbN mathbbN symbbN$


                    is exactly the same. The alias name mathbb for symbb is for backwards compatibility with older code.



                    Some explanation is in order. unicode-math used to have just mathXX commands. However, it was realized that distinguishing between mathXX and symXX is necessary. The first form is about words used in math, the second form for single characters (and doesn't enforce ligatures if used for more characters in a row); these forms can point to different fonts. Typically, for instance, mathbf will use the boldface text font, whereas symbfx will use mbfx, pointing to U+1D431 in the math font.



                    While the distinction is necessary for boldface, in the case of blackboard bold there is no usage of it as a text font, so no distinction is made between mathbb and symbb, by default. You (or a package) might redefine mathbb to do something else (not that I recommend it).



                    What's the preferred form?



                    I'd avoid BbbN and probably prefer symbb for newer documents, unless it's possible to directly type in .






                    share|improve this answer

























                    • Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

                      – user49915
                      Apr 12 at 13:24







                    • 1





                      @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

                      – egreg
                      Apr 12 at 13:26















                    6














                    tl;dr



                    It's completely the same.



                    Why do those four inputs produce the same output?



                    In unicode-math-table.tex we find



                    UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n


                    Every Unicode code point relevant for math has a name, so that unicode-math can do, in this case, the equivalent of



                    Umathchardef`ℕ = "7 "0 "02115


                    (the second number could change in case range=bb is used to select a different font for these characters).



                    If you add showmathbb to your sample TeX file (after begindocument), you'll get



                    > mathbb=long macro:
                    ->symbb .


                    This almost answers your question. At least we know that



                    1. typing or BbbN is the same

                    2. typing mathbbN or symbbN is the same

                    It only remains to discover what's the relationship between the two cases above. Simple: symbbN does BbbN. Not really by chaining N to Bbb, but something like that (it's more complicated because one can use range=bb to use a different font for blackboard bold letters).



                    Now we know that typing



                    $ℕ BbbN mathbbN symbbN$


                    is exactly the same. The alias name mathbb for symbb is for backwards compatibility with older code.



                    Some explanation is in order. unicode-math used to have just mathXX commands. However, it was realized that distinguishing between mathXX and symXX is necessary. The first form is about words used in math, the second form for single characters (and doesn't enforce ligatures if used for more characters in a row); these forms can point to different fonts. Typically, for instance, mathbf will use the boldface text font, whereas symbfx will use mbfx, pointing to U+1D431 in the math font.



                    While the distinction is necessary for boldface, in the case of blackboard bold there is no usage of it as a text font, so no distinction is made between mathbb and symbb, by default. You (or a package) might redefine mathbb to do something else (not that I recommend it).



                    What's the preferred form?



                    I'd avoid BbbN and probably prefer symbb for newer documents, unless it's possible to directly type in .






                    share|improve this answer

























                    • Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

                      – user49915
                      Apr 12 at 13:24







                    • 1





                      @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

                      – egreg
                      Apr 12 at 13:26













                    6












                    6








                    6







                    tl;dr



                    It's completely the same.



                    Why do those four inputs produce the same output?



                    In unicode-math-table.tex we find



                    UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n


                    Every Unicode code point relevant for math has a name, so that unicode-math can do, in this case, the equivalent of



                    Umathchardef`ℕ = "7 "0 "02115


                    (the second number could change in case range=bb is used to select a different font for these characters).



                    If you add showmathbb to your sample TeX file (after begindocument), you'll get



                    > mathbb=long macro:
                    ->symbb .


                    This almost answers your question. At least we know that



                    1. typing or BbbN is the same

                    2. typing mathbbN or symbbN is the same

                    It only remains to discover what's the relationship between the two cases above. Simple: symbbN does BbbN. Not really by chaining N to Bbb, but something like that (it's more complicated because one can use range=bb to use a different font for blackboard bold letters).



                    Now we know that typing



                    $ℕ BbbN mathbbN symbbN$


                    is exactly the same. The alias name mathbb for symbb is for backwards compatibility with older code.



                    Some explanation is in order. unicode-math used to have just mathXX commands. However, it was realized that distinguishing between mathXX and symXX is necessary. The first form is about words used in math, the second form for single characters (and doesn't enforce ligatures if used for more characters in a row); these forms can point to different fonts. Typically, for instance, mathbf will use the boldface text font, whereas symbfx will use mbfx, pointing to U+1D431 in the math font.



                    While the distinction is necessary for boldface, in the case of blackboard bold there is no usage of it as a text font, so no distinction is made between mathbb and symbb, by default. You (or a package) might redefine mathbb to do something else (not that I recommend it).



                    What's the preferred form?



                    I'd avoid BbbN and probably prefer symbb for newer documents, unless it's possible to directly type in .






                    share|improve this answer















                    tl;dr



                    It's completely the same.



                    Why do those four inputs produce the same output?



                    In unicode-math-table.tex we find



                    UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n


                    Every Unicode code point relevant for math has a name, so that unicode-math can do, in this case, the equivalent of



                    Umathchardef`ℕ = "7 "0 "02115


                    (the second number could change in case range=bb is used to select a different font for these characters).



                    If you add showmathbb to your sample TeX file (after begindocument), you'll get



                    > mathbb=long macro:
                    ->symbb .


                    This almost answers your question. At least we know that



                    1. typing or BbbN is the same

                    2. typing mathbbN or symbbN is the same

                    It only remains to discover what's the relationship between the two cases above. Simple: symbbN does BbbN. Not really by chaining N to Bbb, but something like that (it's more complicated because one can use range=bb to use a different font for blackboard bold letters).



                    Now we know that typing



                    $ℕ BbbN mathbbN symbbN$


                    is exactly the same. The alias name mathbb for symbb is for backwards compatibility with older code.



                    Some explanation is in order. unicode-math used to have just mathXX commands. However, it was realized that distinguishing between mathXX and symXX is necessary. The first form is about words used in math, the second form for single characters (and doesn't enforce ligatures if used for more characters in a row); these forms can point to different fonts. Typically, for instance, mathbf will use the boldface text font, whereas symbfx will use mbfx, pointing to U+1D431 in the math font.



                    While the distinction is necessary for boldface, in the case of blackboard bold there is no usage of it as a text font, so no distinction is made between mathbb and symbb, by default. You (or a package) might redefine mathbb to do something else (not that I recommend it).



                    What's the preferred form?



                    I'd avoid BbbN and probably prefer symbb for newer documents, unless it's possible to directly type in .







                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited Apr 12 at 13:27

























                    answered Apr 12 at 7:17









                    egregegreg

                    734k8919333257




                    734k8919333257












                    • Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

                      – user49915
                      Apr 12 at 13:24







                    • 1





                      @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

                      – egreg
                      Apr 12 at 13:26

















                    • Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

                      – user49915
                      Apr 12 at 13:24







                    • 1





                      @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

                      – egreg
                      Apr 12 at 13:26
















                    Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

                    – user49915
                    Apr 12 at 13:24






                    Instead of UnicodeMathSymbol"1D55FBbbnmathalphamathematical double-struck small n, do you probably mean UnicodeMathSymbol"02115BbbNmathalpha/bbb n, open face n?

                    – user49915
                    Apr 12 at 13:24





                    1




                    1





                    @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

                    – egreg
                    Apr 12 at 13:26





                    @user49915 Yes, indeed. Let me fix it: I copied the first match, but didn't notice the case.

                    – egreg
                    Apr 12 at 13:26

















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f484425%2fdo-%25e2%2584%2595-mathbbn-bbbn-symbbn-effectively-differ-and-is-there-a-canonical%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Tamil (spriik) Luke uk diar | Nawigatjuun

                    Align equal signs while including text over equalitiesAMS align: left aligned text/math plus multicolumn alignmentMultiple alignmentsAligning equations in multiple placesNumbering and aligning an equation with multiple columnsHow to align one equation with another multline equationUsing \ in environments inside the begintabularxNumber equations and preserving alignment of equal signsHow can I align equations to the left and to the right?Double equation alignment problem within align enviromentAligned within align: Why are they right-aligned?

                    Training a classifier when some of the features are unknownWhy does Gradient Boosting regression predict negative values when there are no negative y-values in my training set?How to improve an existing (trained) classifier?What is effect when I set up some self defined predisctor variables?Why Matlab neural network classification returns decimal values on prediction dataset?Fitting and transforming text data in training, testing, and validation setsHow to quantify the performance of the classifier (multi-class SVM) using the test data?How do I control for some patients providing multiple samples in my training data?Training and Test setTraining a convolutional neural network for image denoising in MatlabShouldn't an autoencoder with #(neurons in hidden layer) = #(neurons in input layer) be “perfect”?