I've attached a screenshot to illustrate the different glyphs in another
font.
The first part at the top, is a copy/paste directly from your list
message clearly showing different glyphs for various 'quotation' marks.
The font used is Times New Roman, and the app used is TextEdit.app on
MacOS 10.15, significantly enlarged for clarity.
(If mailman eats the attachment let me know and I'll use a 3rd party link.)
It is plain to see that the glyphs to the right of the '3' and '6' inch
measurements are 'right double quotes' and the glyphs to the right of
the '0.25' and '0.5' feet measurements are the 'left single quote' and
'right single quote' respectively. (which should at the least be
consistent, also notice the errant spacing after the 0.25) The vertical
positioning and curvature of the glyph is determining if it is a 'right'
or 'left' quote. One can also see that the glyphs to the *left* of the
'6' and the '0' feet/inch measurements and the *right* of the 'p' in
"strap" are 'double quotation marks' and thus serve as delimiters of a
*quoted text field*.
The other glyphs in between those *double quotation marks* are not
delimiters, thus they don't separate the data in a CSV to another
field/column. (even the comma contained therein will not, because it
lies between the quotes)
-----
Now, observe the second example in the attachment. You'll see the proper
'prime' and 'double prime' glyphs for both feet and inches,
respectively. Not only is the angle of the slant from the top-right to
bottom-left, but the top-right is thicker. These are properly rendered
glyphs.
Other font families are not so faithful to these special or extended
glyphs and can often render them on screen, or even in print (yes, that
too can differ) in nearly identical fashion to standard ASCII 27/28
single/double quotation marks.
For many basic cases, one need not be concerned with typographical
specialties, but in some cases, like this one, not being cognizant of
those differences, can result in a significant amount of frustration.
This is a clear case of 'looks close is not good enough', it needs to be
*correct*. (and while LO Calc did parse the cell divisions properly, the
actual glyphs representing inches and feet, are still wrong)
Regards,
Adrien
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
