At 06:31 AM 6/29/00 -0800, you wrote:
>Thanks to all for your comments. Has anyone actually used these tags
>yet?
Maybe we should postpone these tags for a while until we get a louder
answer to your question, Doug. Once coded, here forever.
A./
At 07:34 AM 6/29/00 -0800, Doug Ewell wrote:
>Of course, neither Plane 14 tags nor SCSU has achieved much popularity
>yet, so at present this is only an academic observation.
Unlike Plane 14, SCSU is not necessarily intended for unfettered public
interchange as if it was YAUTF (yet another utf).
Ar 23:00 -0800 2000-07-01, scríobh Asmus Freytag:
>At 06:31 AM 6/29/00 -0800, you wrote:
>>Thanks to all for your comments. Has anyone actually used these tags
>>yet?
>
>Maybe we should postpone these tags for a while until we get a louder
>answer to your question, Doug. Once coded, here forever.
Asmus Freytag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unlike Plane 14, SCSU is not necessarily intended for unfettered
> public interchange as if it was YAUTF (yet another utf). Yes, it can
> be nice and small, but it assumes that the recipient have a conformant
> decoder and can reliably detect when to inv
11-Digit Boy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Note that this is a text tagging issue, not a Unicode issue, unless
>> you feel that there is some need to indicate Ruby/Furigana in plain
>> text. At some point, plain text ceases to be plain if you decide
At 02:37 PM 7/1/00 -0800, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:
>Well, its not entirely fair to say that Furigana is another way of saying
>Ruby in OpenType, since Furigana predates OpenType entirely, as well as the
>HTML/DHTML RUBY element.
>They do provide the same functionality though... Furigana
"John Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... In any case, Furigana is definitely what Adobe had
> in mind when they registered the feature, as
> is evident from the feature description.
Is this OT ruby feature to be applied when e.g. a
tag is encountered in HTML / XML? Or is this supposed to
At 09:16 AM 7/2/00 -0800, Doug Ewell wrote:
>The problem with the phrase "plain text ceases to be plain if you decide
>that layout information needs to be encoded" is the word "layout." In
>the broadest sense, line and paragraph separation could be considered
>"layout," and nobody would suggest
The REAL problem with this may be that the people discussing this issue
are not native speakers of Japanese. Truth be told, neither am I. All
I know is, furigana are a BIG help when you don't know many kanji.
___
Get your own FREE Bo
In Asmus's defense, there are fewer recipients that will understand SCSU right now, so
one needs to be a bit more carefull about slinging it around. On the other hand, for
anything outside of plain English, it is quite a handy mechanism for interchanging
Unicode text, so it can reduce memory co
At 11:16 AM 7/2/00 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>The REAL problem with this may be that the people discussing this issue
>are not native speakers of Japanese. Truth be told, neither am I. All
>I know is, furigana are a BIG help when you don't know many kanji.
The question I'm pondering is whe
11 matches
Mail list logo
