[Cfp-interest 2826] Re: CFP review of TS-4 and TS-5 revisions

[Damian McGuckin]

Jim,

On Thu, 17 Aug 2023, Jim Thomas wrote:

> Hmm. It doesn?t look so bad to me (using Acrobat Reader). Can you elaborate?
> I believe we could change the summation/product style so that the i=0 is at
> the bottom and to the right of the sigma/pi and n-1 is at the top and to the
> right of sigma/pi. I think putting the i=0 and n-1 on the bottom and top of
> the sigma/pi would be too tall or too small.

Disclaimer: I do not yet need glasses but my eyes are aging by definition!

I can live with it as it is but I had to do a few takes until I was sure I 
was reading it correctly. I zoomed it up and here is what I saw.

I am using Acrobat Reader. Maybe I need to load some new fonts.

The SIGMA symbol is really very thin.

The 'i', 0, and 1 are also thin.

The 'n' looks like it is a much bolder/thicker font.

My 2c.

I have read the result of the section and it looks pretty good.

But I need to go over it a few more time before I give my final review.

It certainly looks like it matches what IEEE 754 says.

Thanks - Damian

Pacific Engineering Systems International ..... 20D Grose St, Glebe NSW 2037
Ph:+61-2-8571-0847 .. Fx:+61-2-9692-9623 | unsolicited email not wanted here
Views & opinions here are mine and not those of any past or present employer