STIX-feedback.md

@@ -38,7 +38,9 @@
 
 * Some glyphs used for style (*-Bold, *-Italic, *-BoldItalic) and mathvariant (Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols unicode block for Bold, Italic, Bold Italic, Bold Script, Bold Fraktur, Sans Serif Bold, Sans Serif Italic, Sans Serif Bold Italic) are probably duplicate. Currently our Python script preserves all the glyphs while MathJax only needs a subset of them to implement the MathML mathvariant and style attributes.
 
-* Note of the design of the Web fonts: splitting the fonts will require some changes like dropping the Open Type Math table, adding space characters for monospace, moving non-Unicode glyphs to the Plane0 PUA etc In general the splitting is designed for MathJax's purpose and may not work well in browsers. Anyway, browsers could just use WOFF packaging of the STIX-Word, without further modifications.
+______
+
+Note on the design of the Web fonts: splitting the fonts will require some changes like dropping the Open Type Math table, adding space characters for monospace, moving non-Unicode glyphs to the Plane0 PUA etc In general the splitting is designed for MathJax's purpose and may not work well in browsers. Anyway, browsers could just use WOFF packaging of the STIX-Word, without further modifications.
  > Peter: @Fred Could you specify "may not work well in browsers"? What functionality will be lost, which loss can be worked around (without MathJax) etc.
 
 Fred: @Peter If browsers use Open Type Math table in the future, the Web fonts without Open Type MATH table will not be usable. In general, for browsers and users it is easier and more convenient to have only one font-family to handle. For example, if one wants to use STIX fonts (and if STIX-Math and STIX-Regular are merged as proposed here) users will just use the CSS rule "math { font-family: STIX; }" and they additionally want to specify Web fonts