Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

x with an over dot


x with an over dot

There are a manner to put a dot over a variable? This is, the Newton notation, or something that else.

Thanks a lot.


It's been asked for (over in the feature suggestion section), but there is no general way of doing that. Some fonts may have some characters that include an over dot, but that't all that's possible.

� � � � Tom Gutman

On 5/3/2006 1:32:16 AM, anhidro wrote:
>There are a manner to put a
>dot over a variable? This is,
>the Newton notation, or
>something that else.
>Thanks a lot.

If you want to copy books, convert in Mathcad executable.
Otherwise, what is the point ?


I have a dot in Var Name (on MAS) as.
The dot is in index A.b.c. But instead A I have... a spase - b.c:=25 b.c/2=12.5


Thanks Tom, Val. �The point, jmG? Only teach with (and see) a notation wich some peoples implements some years ago. I'm not want nothing like Overdot[x,1] ... only some cheat with rtf, perhaps.


If you're willing to cheat, you can always design your own font.

� � � � Tom Gutman

I would like to see it for the same reasons. I have used the backward tick "`" on the tilde "~" key to indicate derivatives, but I'd also like to see the dotted notation available. I tried a few times to emulate it and all I got was Mathcad blowing up and shutting down.

I think that a solution would have to come from Mathcad unless someone wants to make the character set. Even then, what would we choose? I'd use ...x...theta...y...??? Don't know offhand how I'd like to see it implemented.


Here is a copy of something I proposed a while back. I have no way to know whether Mathsoft is considering this. Nor whether they are considering full Unicode support, which would provide an alternative solution (Unicode includes a wide range of combining characters).

� � � � Tom Gutman

Common usage uses a number of embellishments on variables for various purposes. I just ran into the dots, for time derivative. Statistics commonly uses overbars and carets. Supporting such embellishments would allow more equations to be entered into Mathcad the same way they appear in the printed text.

Mathcad already has provision for identifying some special handling of characters, currently supporting the Greek font. I propose extending that for a variety of common embellishments.

Entry would be similar to the current handling of Greek letters. With the cursor positioned after the characer to be embellished, a specific keystroke (ctrl-shift-e seems to be available) is used, followed by a single character specifying the embellishment to be added. The following characters would be available:

. This would add a dot above the character. Multiple dots can be used, and are displayed next to each other. Support for up to three dots is probably sufficient for practical use.

- This would add a bar above the character. It is desirable, but not essential, that such a bar be visually distinct from the complex conjugate bar, I suggest a different weight.

^ This would add a caret above the character.

~ This would add a tilde above the character. This is not the same as using a character with a tilde. While I would not expect it to be used, it would be legitimate to put an embelishment tilde over a character with a tilde, the two tildes need not look the same.

_ This would add a line under the character.

space This would remove the last added embellishments.

When multiple embellishments are applied above a single character they should stack up vertically from bottom to top, except for adjacent dots which should display horizontially. Even without multiple embellishments (other than dots) this would be quite useful, but multiple embellishments add a bit of range.

Using this scheme the embellishments are restricted to being over a single character (although in a multi-character name each character could have it's own embellishment). This is sufficient for most common mathematical use.

What you have written here and the use of Unicode are both good recommendations. It seems to me that more folks are using Mathcad for more purposes: good for Mathsoft's income and the fiture of Mathcad, but greater demands on the product.

There will be competition from others such as Maple, too, because the desire for better products is clearly present.


"There will be competition from others such as Maple, too, because the desire for better products is clearly present".

Maple is a different product, more oriented toward classroom use. Maple is something like Mathematica, i.e: not for use.
Matlab is another story: if your engineering application is not resident = good luck !


The examples in this work sheet are extracted from serious literature . Literature is crippled of typo mistakes...etc. This is why I reject your dot and other gyzmas . If you want to copy pages of literature, just scan them. If you want to teach what the literature is supposed to convey: then make it work first, and to make it work you don't need dot over letter and other gyzmas. Your dot has to be converted, then why doing a useless step in the first place ?


Standard notation is important. Mathcad is supposed to allow - even promote - the use of standard mathematical notation. This is one of Mathcad's strengths. It is not merely a program for calculations, it is also a medium for communication. Many Mathcad worksheets are submitted to colleagues and authorities for review. They need to be as clear and recognizable as possible. Parts of Mathcad worksheets are sometimes published in book without editing simply because they are presentable without the additional effort of using, say, TEX to compose presentable mathematics. This helps make the publication error free, but if the copy is not presentable, for example because it is not in standard notation, then a more complicated, and error-prone, method must be used. Standard notation aids comprehension. In my field it is far better to use "x̅" to represent the mean or average than "x-bar". The character with the diacritical mark is more easily recognized and is more compact. For twenty years I have believed that Mathcad ought to provide more diacritical marks, and I think other engineers, scientists and mathematicians would agree with me. If you want your programming to be incomprehensible, use a spreadsheet.

Earlier, Tom Gutman proposed that
>Entry would be similar to the
>current handling of Greek
>letters. With the cursor
>positioned after the characer
>to be embellished, a specific
>keystroke (ctrl-shift-e seems
>to be available) is used,
>followed by a single character
>specifying the embellishment
>to be added.

An alternative entry system, one that is often used in languages/alphabets which employ accents and diacritical marks, is to (1) position the cursor after the character, and then (2) toggle a specific keystroke (possibly double rather than triple) which then cycles through a restrictive set (possibly prescribed by the user) of diacritical marks (e.g. dot, caret, overbar, arrow, tilde, and null).

This approach obviates the need to memorize a multiplicity of keystrokes unique to each mark, albeit at the cost of a restrictive set (since otherwise, the number of toggling strokes could prove excessive).

This is what I�ve discovered :
- To type x-dotted, type x and from Character map-Tahoma font, select-copy "combinable upper dot" (U+0307) and paste in Mathcad
- To type x-double dotted, type x and from Character map-Tahoma font, select-copy "combinable diaeresis" (U+0308) and paste in Mathcad.
Good luck

thanks! Seems that this works in mc14, and in mc11 is translated to the unicode steps, but preserving the functionality. I go to see your proposal with more detail.


Mathematica does a lot of this weird letters. But they don't use in the help sheet. Their fonts are available as soon as you download "Publicon" their math reader. The entire world use ' or d(f(x)/dx and you want a dot over it ... why not a square ?


Obviously, the "entire world" does not use only those two forms.

Aero and navigation use almost exclusively the dot form.


I have seen lot papers with dot, and most valuable somewhat ancient books too. But my recollection it that it was conventionalized ' . I like dot . Think writing and Odeslove font 10 wth f and you see nothing . Dot over it will make it better, but you would have to have all letters dot.
Like the decimal coma, dot, dot-centered ...
Same for date 20060505 =
American (some time ago)... may 05, 2006
collab 05 may 2006.

I like dot over letter, but vote NO

In fact, following math formulas is easier D^n

In vote for superscript D^n


>>you want a dot over it ... why not a square ?<<

Because I've seen a lot of papers that use dots, and none that use a square.

� � � � Tom Gutman