Using Math Symbols in InDesign
If you’re working on a document that contains any kind of math in the text, even just dimensions like “8.5 × 11,” you should be using the correct math symbols. You wouldn’t use inch marks where quotation marks are needed, right? So don’t use a lowercase x when you need a multiplication sign, which looks much different in most fonts (especially serifs).
See the difference?
Ditto for minus signs, which are usually much wider than the hyphens that sometimes get used instead.
Likewise, multiplication dots are found in most commercial fonts, and are usually a lot smaller than a standard bullet character.
Use InDesign’s Glyphs panel and choose Show: Math Symbols to see all your options in the font you’re using. Some fonts include lots of math glyphs. For example, Neutraface gives you six versions of each of the basic math symbols.
Case-sensitive glyphs like the parentheses in the bottom example below can also make for better looking math. In this case, standard parentheses are too low and not vertically centered on the numbers.
Need a math symbol that’s not in any of your current fonts? Check out STIX fonts (available for free download at their website or at Adobe Fonts), which contain thousands of math glyphs.
 |
I agree with the math symbols, but when it comes to things like 9 x 11 (i.e., cookbooks and the size of baking pans), the book publishers don’t want the times/multiplication symbol. Their reasoning is that it it NOT a math symbol (i.e., as in an equation). Same thing with 81/2 x 11. It’s not an equation.
So we use lower case “x.”
I’ll have to check the Chicago Manual, but I think it agrees.
In my experience any dimensions, whether they’re pixels, inches, or other units are always indicated with the multiplication sign. I think most style guides, including Chicago say the same: https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Numbers/faq0035.html
You’re probably Right, Mike. All I can do is follow what the customers want.
Indeed. The customer is always right :)
I disagree. I think in this case the customer is plainly wrong. The saying should be updated to “The customer is often incredibly, painfully wrong, and we will do whatever we can to gently educate and encourage the customer to wake up and smell the coffee and see the errors of their ways, but ultimately, we’ll do what the customer wants, even if it means taking our name off the finished product because we would never want to be associated with a project that looked so ugly.”
:-D
Sounds like you speak from experience. ;)
Well, all the book publishers follow that style (i.e., lowercase “x” for things like 8 x 11 sheet of paper, or 9 x 11 baking sheet. They only use the times/multiplication sign for actual equations or math.
And to be honest–I think an “x” looks better in the examples I gave. But that’s just me.
I think the publisher’s argument back in the day was that the multiplication/times symbol is exactly that. A times sign. For example 2 X 2 = 4 (pretend the cap X is a times sign). That makes sense–two times two equals four.
But in the case of the sheet of paper or baking sheet, it would be 8 by 11 or 9 by 11. Not 8 times 11 or 9 times 11.
Anyway–I think that was their rationale. And if the major book publishers want it done that way–I’m not going to argue with them.
Well, certainly not ALL the book publishers. In my work, I’ve never met a publisher that would accept a lower case X in any of those examples. Whether it’s showing mathematics or just being used in place of “by,” typographically, that symbol should always be a multiplication symbol.
Thanks!
Great tip Mike. Would like to know about external editors such as MathType in InDesign
the therefore symbol is not there