Ralph Shumaker wrote: > > I remember in whendoze95 being able to find (and use) a few check marks > from the character mapper. But in the documents I pulled from over > there, the check marks didn't survive. Well, that's not true. The > character survived, that is the hex code stayed the same, but the > appearance of a check mark had vanished. >
When you say _the_ "hex code", I suppose you mean a single-byte value used in some extension of the 7-bit ASCII standard. I would guess. maybe 0xFB from "codepage 437". The attempt to deal with the need for many such extensions (for many languages) led to the "codepage" mess, which sorta-worked, at least for "western" languages. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codepage But today, the best attempts use unicode character definitions ("U+2713 Check Mark") and encoding schemes (eg UTF-8: 0xE2 0x9C 0x93). If you want to dive in, you can wander around at great length from many starting points, such as http://www.unicode.org/ or (say) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_character_set ..jim -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-newbie
