Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
At 12:28 -0500 2001-10-02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would be possible to add a new character DASH WITH DIAERESIS as long as it does not have any decomposition. Opening the door to lots of nice dictionary things. SWUNG DASH is also sorely missing, but it will be coming up in some FUPA proposals in due course. -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement)
Re: Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 (derives from Egyptian Transliteration Characters)
Maybe someday some of the characters might be promoted to become regular unicode characters by the Unicode Consortium, maybe not. Not likely. Unicode refuses to encode more ligatures and precomposed characters. Is there an official Unicode Consortium statement that states, for the record, that the Unicode Consortium refuses to encode more ligatures and precomposed characters please? I feel that this is a matter that needs to be formally resolved one way or the other, so that, if such a refusal has been declared then people who wish to have these characters encoded may act knowing that the Unicode Consortium will have legally estopped itself from making any future complaint that it has some right to set the standards in such a matter and that those people who would like to see the problem solved and ligatured characters encoded as single characters so that a font can be produced may proceed accordingly, perhaps approaching the international standards body directly if the Unicode Consortium refuses to do so without a process of even considering individual submissions on their individual merits. On the other hand, if no such formal statement has been issued, then those people who would like to see the problem solved and ligatured characters encoded as single characters so that a font can be produced for use with software such as Microsoft Word may proceed to define characters in the private use area in a manner compatible with their possible promotion to being regular unicode characters in the presentation forms section. The absence of a formal statement coupled to an informal nudge nudge wink wink everybody knows what is meant but it will not be set out as a formal statement is not, in my own opinion, an acceptable situation, so I ask please for formal clarification of the claimed refusal one way or the other. I feel that it would be quite wrong to pull up the ladder on the possibility of adding characters such as the ct ligature as U+FB07 without the possibility of consideration of each case on its merits at the time that a possibility arises. A situation would then exist that several ligatures have been defined as U+FB00 through to U+FB06 including one long s ligature, yet that U+FB07 through to U+FB12 must remain unused even though they could be quite reasonably used for ct and various long s ligatures so as to produce a set of characters that could be used, if desired, for transcribing the typography of an 18th Century printed book. Yet, if the ladder has been pulled up, perhaps U+FB07 can be defined as the ct ligature directly by the international standards organization and the international standards organization could decide directly about including the long s ligatures. If the possibility of fair consideration is, however, still open, then the ct ligature could be defined as U+E707 within the private use area and published as part of an independent private initiative amongst those members of the unicode user community that would like to be able to use that character in a document by the character being encoded as a character in an ordinary font file. That would enable font makers to add in the ct character if they so choose. My point is that the specification purports to lay down the rules, yet there seems to be many other pieces of information that seem to be understood on a nudge nudge basis and that words that are in the specification about the private use area such as published seem to be overlooked in discussions of using the private use area. It is unfortunate that an attempt to quite happily seek to use the private use area as set out in the specification, where the word published is used, seems to become controversialized. William Overington 2 October 2001
Re: Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 (derives from Egyptian Transliteration Characters)
From: William Overington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there an official Unicode Consortium statement that states, for the record, that the Unicode Consortium refuses to encode more ligatures and precomposed characters please? I think it is quite clearly stated that the ones that ARE present are there for backwards compatibility with pre-existing standards. Not sure why you feel that it is important to do more than this? Perhaps the standard is not applying as much verbiage to it as you would like it to -- but the point is just as valid in a sentence as in a chapter. If you like, you can propose such characters -- even a completely preposterous proposal (which this is not!) would not be ignored. If it is refused, then you can understand that the people here are trying to guide your noble (but in my humble opinion misplaced) effort to use Unicode in some way (any way) that it is not in fact why its customers need to use it. It is unfortunate that an attempt to quite happily seek to use the private use area as set out in the specification, where the word published is used, seems to become controversialized. I think you are misunderstanding the intentions of the people who have been commenting. Your ideas are not bad or wrong or controversial. Some of them simply do not mesh with the intentions of Unicode in every case. People who comment are not claiming controversy since these decisions have already been made and do not need to be made again. I think I stated a long time ago that there is much useful work that COULD be done, long before anyone will be bored enough to want to invent new standards such as STST2001 which really do not mesh with the present goals of Unicode. Will you not apply some of the boundless energy that you give to STST into some of those items? Obviously Unicode is not a place to go for fame or glory, or to be remembered for all time as the person who invented __ (fill in the blank here). But it is still useful work that many people will use. And people appreciate Unicode best when they do not notice it. :-) MichKa Michael Kaplan Trigeminal Software, Inc. http://www.trigeminal.com/
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
At 09:13 -0500 2001-09-26, David Starner wrote: The problem is, I have a couple of German texts that I plan to transcribe, where all I need is HYPHEN WITH DIARESIS. So, you type HYPHEN or EN DASH and then COMBINING DIAERESIS ABOVE. It isn't obvious to me that this is the correct solution: first, one needs to decide whether 002d, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 or 2212 will be used, and then try to ensure that that is what is consistently used. More importantly, though, there is a question as to whether any of these has the appropriate character properties. For instance, I'm guessing that the line-breaking properties would be wrong for this usage. It would be possible to add a new character DASH WITH DIAERESIS as long as it does not have any decomposition. - Peter --- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
3. a capital and small glottal stop and reversed glottal stop For (2), (3), we would need a submission with documentation of usage. We do add capital/small versions of characters when there is sufficient evidence of their usage. This happens, for example, when an IPA is pressed into service in the regular orthography of a language. To submit a proposal, go to www.unicode.org, click on submitting proposals (you may already be following that, since it recommends discussing proposals on this list!) I recently learned of some languages using upper and lower case glottal stops. I don't have details at the moment, but have anticipated writing a proposal once the linguists involved provide further info. - Peter --- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
The missing characters can be characterised as follows: LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW LATIN SMALL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW When I saw this I remembered that there is a letter H with a line across it that is used in Maltese. I remembered this from seeing it in a catalogue of metal type which listed the accents needed for various European languages, not from a linguistic perspective, so I do not know if that letter would be appropriate for your needs. My thoughts are that, as the use is for transliteration for study rather than for transcription as a direct record it might perhaps be a suitable choice for your use, even if only on a temporary basis, with the big advantage that the letters are not only already coded in unicode as U+0126 for LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH STROKE and U+0127 for LATIN SMALL LETTER H WITH STROKE (the 0126 and 0127 being hexadecimal representations) but also that both are often included in fonts that are available now. If someone happens to be using an older version of Word that has not got those characters available in the font being used then later versions of several fonts, including Arial and Times New Roman, that do contain the characters are available free from the http://www.microsoft.com/typography/fontpack/default.htm webpage. In the Microsoft Word program one simply uses Insert Symbol and then finds the desired character in the display provided. One can even set up short cuts so that some combination such as Alt + Shift + H gives the one character and Alt + H gives the other character using text entry using an ordinary English keyboard. I do have a further suggestion regarding the use of the Private Use Area, though as that has a wider context, I will start a new thread for that suggestion. William Overington 30 September 2001
RE: Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 (derives from Egyptian Transliteration Characters)
William, It looks like if you really want multilingual support that you need to run your text through a layout engine. If that is the case then you can remap certain characters or character combinations into the U+FDD0 to U+FDEF Unicode range and use this special non-character area for what ever purpose the font and layout engine needs. If the private area becomes standardized then it is no longer a private area. Carl -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William Overington Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 9:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 (derives from Egyptian Transliteration Characters) In a recent thread entitled Egyptian Transliteration Characters, a request was made for various characters including the following. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW LATIN SMALL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW There was also a suggestion from a participant in the thread for a character HYPHEN WITH DIARESIS for use in preparing a vocabulary list in German. I have been thinking recently that it would be useful to have presentation forms for a ct ligature character and various long s ligatures so that one may transcribe printed works from the 18th century into unicode while keeping the typographic style intact. There is already U+017F LATIN SMALL LETTER LONG S and U+FB05 LATIN SMALL LIGATURE LONG S T in regular unicode. I am thinking of such characters as LATIN SMALL LIGATURE LONG S LONG S and LATIN SMALL LIGATURE LONG S L and LATIN SMALL LIGATURE LONG S B and so on. There are perhaps about a dozen long s ligatures that could usefully be encoded. In view of these various situations and possibly various others that people might like to post into this thread, I write to put forward the suggestion that as a discussion on this list various users of the unicode specification might like to agree informally a collection of characters called Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 or STST2001 to be defined in the Private Use Area in, say, the range U+E700 through to U+E7FF in the hope that perhaps by there being some informal agreement perhaps someone with a font generating package might like to add them into a font and maybe various small yet significant benefits to the facilities available for encoding text might be achieved. Maybe someday some of the characters might be promoted to become regular unicode characters by the Unicode Consortium, maybe not. I feel that it is better to have available soon rather than not to have available some informal list with some level of agreement amongst users, even if only tacit agreement, so that it is possible to use unicode to encode the various characters for the various purposes. Please know that I am specifically suggesting that this be a discussion amongst the user community: I am not suggesting that the Unicode Consortium endorse this suggestion as I am fully aware that the rules for the use of the Private Use Area specifically say that no assignment to a particular set of characters will ever be endorsed by the Unicode Consortium. So, whilst recognizing that that statement in the specification may not preclude the Unicode Consortium from saying that some particular usage of the Private Use Area is wrong in some way, the absence of any encouragement from the Unicode Consortium over the definition of Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 should not be seen as in any way an objection to it being defined. I declare an interest in the choice of U+E700 to U+E7FF as the range for STST2001 in that I have been defining and publishing, as part of my research, designations for a number of characters in the Private Use Area for a specific application area, namely for use in Java programming for the DVB-MHP (Digital Video Broadcasting - Multimedia Home Platform) system and this particular range does not conflict with the codes that I am using in that project, so the choice of U+E700 to U+E7FF as the range would be particularly convenient to me. If anyone is interested to see those definitions then they are in the DVB-MHP section of http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo which is our family webspace in England. There are references in various of the documents, namely the Contemporary introduction, the document about Sequential text files and their applications and in the second and third documents about the Astrolabe Channel numerical pointer. It is hard to even guess how many characters there are that people might like to suggest for STST2001 and maybe there will be only a few and sorts can be added gradually over a number of years, or maybe the tray will be filled up quickly and starting another tray will need to be considered. Hopefully STST2001 will be a useful facility and then when someone chooses to put forward a suggestion for a character to be available
Re: Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 (derives from Egyptian Transliteration Characters)
On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 04:59:49PM +0100, William Overington wrote: In view of these various situations and possibly various others that people might like to post into this thread, I write to put forward the suggestion that as a discussion on this list various users of the unicode specification might like to agree informally a collection of characters called Special Type Sorts Tray 2001 or STST2001 to be defined in the Private Use Area in, say, the range U+E700 through to U+E7FF in the hope that All those characters can be encoded in Unicode already. Use a ZWJ for the ligated characters. And all those characters can be displayed on an OpenType system - the H with line below and hyphen with diaresis can be display on my xterm with overprinted combining characters. The rest of the world has a solution for this; a hacked solution may be usable on some systems that can't get it right, but there's no need to standardize it. Did you notice that all the characters you mentioned are for Latin scripts? Some other scripts, in normal use, can take more than 256 glyphs to be right - see the Arabic pre-shaped glyphs and the precomposed Hangul characters for examples. I bet I can fill that with Latin examples alone. Malay Grammar has a ligated ng. Lakota has at least couple dozen non-precomposed letters. Lithuanian needs its couple dozen. Math books will arbitarily compose any letter with any symbol - I can get a couple dozen examples from what I have on hand. The Fraktur ligations probably add up to a couple dozen there. I don't think I'd have any problem coming up with 256 examples, all clearly documented as to source with scans, by the end of the day. Maybe someday some of the characters might be promoted to become regular unicode characters by the Unicode Consortium, maybe not. Not likely. Unicode refuses to encode more ligatures and precomposed characters. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org I saw a daemon stare into my face, and an angel touch my breast; each one softly calls my name . . . the daemon scares me less. - Disciple, Stuart Davis
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
At 15:05 -0700 2001-09-26, §§Û§§¶§Í§Â§¶§½ wrote: Is this the same Unicode that encodes characters and not glyphs? Yes, it is, and I am not certain that Mark's strong suspicion is correct because I have seen a lot of data. But I'll be asking Egyptologists. 1. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD 2. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN I strongly suspect that current diacritics (for 1) and modifier letters (for 2) are similar enough in shape to what is required that they can be used. Are there any other characters used by Egyptologist that are so close in shape to i?? and ?? or ?? that they cannot be used? I don't know what i?? and ?? or ?? were meant to be, Mark. -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement)
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
For what its worth I did not think of doing anything with the YODs because of their close correspondence to 1F30GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH PSILI 1F38GREEK CAPITAL LETTER IOTA WITH PSILI Which in practice would look all the more like the YODs because of the standard egyptological practice if italicising transliterations. But having said that I certainly have no problem with these characters and this is somewhat more systematic that would be the case were one to use iotas. - Spencer Michael Everson everson@evertyp e.com Sent by: unicode-bounce@uTo:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nicode.org cc: Subject:Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters 27.09.01 12:41 At 15:05 -0700 2001-09-26, §?§Û§?§¶§Í§Â§¶§½ wrote: Is this the same Unicode that encodes characters and not glyphs? Yes, it is, and I am not certain that Mark's strong suspicion is correct because I have seen a lot of data. But I'll be asking Egyptologists. 1. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD 2. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN I strongly suspect that current diacritics (for 1) and modifier letters (for 2) are similar enough in shape to what is required that they can be used. Are there any other characters used by Egyptologist that are so close in shape to i?? and ?? or ?? that they cannot be used? I don't know what i?? and ?? or ?? were meant to be, Mark. -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement)
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
You need to get a Unicode-enabled browser and font ;-) Attached is a screen shot, and here is the html (sorry for the decimal, but I'm in a rush, and that's what MS gives you): "shape to i#777; and #699; or #703; that they cannot be used?" Mark — Δός μοι ποῦ στῶ, καὶ κινῶ τὴν γῆν — Ἀρχιμήδης[http://www.macchiato.com] - Original Message - From: "Michael Everson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 3:41 AM Subject: Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters At 15:05 -0700 2001-09-26, §§Û§S§¶§Í§Â§¶§½ wrote: Is this the same Unicode that encodes characters and not glyphs? Yes, it is, and I am not certain that Mark's "strong" suspicion is correct because I have seen a lot of data. But I'll be asking Egyptologists. 1. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD 2. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN I strongly suspect that current diacritics (for 1) and modifier letters (for 2) are similar enough in shape to what is required that they can be used. Are there any other characters used by Egyptologist that are so close in shape to i?? and ?? or ?? that they cannot be used? I don't know what i?? and ?? or ?? were meant to be, Mark. -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement) eqypt.gif
Egyptian Transliteration Characters
Hello One and All, Before setting off down the path of submitting a couple of new characters I would like to run them past you for your consideration. If I have ben blind as a bat and these characters already exist please correct me in my error. But first, a little context... I am an Egyptologist and, as you can imagine, transliteration is big in Egyptology since it is not only essential in language teaching but a major convenience in its own right. While complete unanimity is lacking amongst egyptologists concerning the conventions for transliteration there is way better than 95% agreement on the basics. Not surprisingly the Unicode character-set already addresses nearly every character required to transliterate Ancient Egyptian according to any of the alternative schemes which may be used. However, it appears that one character is missing (OK, 2 characters if we say uncial and diminuative) and another is not available in the form in which egyptologists are accustomed to encounter it. The missing characters can be characterised as follows: LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW LATIN SMALL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW I model these descriptions on those of 1E0E, 1E6E, 1E2A, 1E24 (at least insofar as the capital is concerned). Now, I know that the correct appearance could be achieved using combining characters, but it seems a pain to have to do this for one character only. The other character - the one that just does not appear in a form commonly used in egyptology - corresponds in function to the glottal stop (02C0),but rather than represent this as something that looks like a right half ring with a tail egyptologists have represented it with something that looks like two right half rings stacked on top of each other. To illustrate this rather poor description a little more graphically let me say that in typescript egyptologists often just fake it by typing a 3. By the way we typically refer to this character as aleph, modelled on the Hebrew. ... Then there is the small issue that we like to use capitals in transliterating proper nouns - but does it even make sense to have a capital and small glottal stop and reversed glottal stop? I will stop now before I embarass myself. Many thanks to all who will reply. - Spencer Tasker
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 09:42:32AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The missing characters can be characterised as follows: LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW LATIN SMALL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW I model these descriptions on those of 1E0E, 1E6E, 1E2A, 1E24 (at least insofar as the capital is concerned). Now, I know that the correct appearance could be achieved using combining characters, but it seems a pain to have to do this for one character only. The problem is, I have a couple of German texts that I plan to transcribe, where all I need is HYPHEN WITH DIARESIS. (It's used in a vocabulary list to indicate mutation of the vowel for the plural form.) The Lithuanians only needed a few more combining characters for pedagogal reasons, as put forth in their proposal a few years ago. There's so many places that could use just one or two more combining characters, that Unicode has basically drawn a line in the sand. (Also, it messes with the Composition/Decomposition algorithm to add more composed characters.) -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org When the aliens come, when the deathrays hum, when the bombers bomb, we'll still be freakin' friends. - Freakin' Friends
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
Of your three issues: 1. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW 2. something that looks like a right half ring with a tail egyptologists have represented it with something that looks like two right half rings stacked on top of each other. 3. a capital and small glottal stop and reversed glottal stop For (1), they are already representable in Unicode, as you state. The policy is not to introduce new precomposed characters, because of normalization stability. A new precomposed character is disallowed in NFC, so it would end up being decomposed in NFC systems in any event: with XML, etc. For (2), (3), we would need a submission with documentation of usage. We do add capital/small versions of characters when there is sufficient evidence of their usage. This happens, for example, when an IPA is pressed into service in the regular orthography of a language. To submit a proposal, go to www.unicode.org, click on submitting proposals (you may already be following that, since it recommends discussing proposals on this list!) Mark — Δός μοι ποῦ στῶ, καὶ κινῶ τὴν γῆν — Ἀρχιμήδης [http://www.macchiato.com] - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:42 AM Subject: Egyptian Transliteration Characters Hello One and All, Before setting off down the path of submitting a couple of new characters I would like to run them past you for your consideration. If I have ben blind as a bat and these characters already exist please correct me in my error. But first, a little context... I am an Egyptologist and, as you can imagine, transliteration is big in Egyptology since it is not only essential in language teaching but a major convenience in its own right. While complete unanimity is lacking amongst egyptologists concerning the conventions for transliteration there is way better than 95% agreement on the basics. Not surprisingly the Unicode character-set already addresses nearly every character required to transliterate Ancient Egyptian according to any of the alternative schemes which may be used. However, it appears that one character is missing (OK, 2 characters if we say uncial and diminuative) and another is not available in the form in which egyptologists are accustomed to encounter it. The missing characters can be characterised as follows: LATIN CAPITAL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW LATIN SMALL LETTER H WITH LINE BELOW I model these descriptions on those of 1E0E, 1E6E, 1E2A, 1E24 (at least insofar as the capital is concerned). Now, I know that the correct appearance could be achieved using combining characters, but it seems a pain to have to do this for one character only. The other character - the one that just does not appear in a form commonly used in egyptology - corresponds in function to the glottal stop (02C0),but rather than represent this as something that looks like a right half ring with a tail egyptologists have represented it with something that looks like two right half rings stacked on top of each other. To illustrate this rather poor description a little more graphically let me say that in typescript egyptologists often just fake it by typing a 3. By the way we typically refer to this character as aleph, modelled on the Hebrew. ... Then there is the small issue that we like to use capitals in transliterating proper nouns - but does it even make sense to have a capital and small glottal stop and reversed glottal stop? I will stop now before I embarass myself. Many thanks to all who will reply. - Spencer Tasker
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
At 07:20 -0700 2001-09-26, Mark Davis wrote: 2. something that looks like a right half ring with a tail egyptologists have represented it with something that looks like two right half rings stacked on top of each other. 3. a capital and small glottal stop and reversed glottal stop For (2), (3), we would need a submission with documentation of usage. We do add capital/small versions of characters when there is sufficient evidence of their usage. This happens, for example, when an IPA is pressed into service in the regular orthography of a language. Pleas http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2241.pdf, my N2241: Proposal to add 6 Egyptological characters to the UCS -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement)
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
At 09:13 -0500 2001-09-26, David Starner wrote: The problem is, I have a couple of German texts that I plan to transcribe, where all I need is HYPHEN WITH DIARESIS. So, you type HYPHEN or EN DASH and then COMBINING DIAERESIS ABOVE. -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement)
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
In a message dated 2001-09-26 8:09:18 Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The problem is, I have a couple of German texts that I plan to transcribe, where all I need is HYPHEN WITH DIARESIS. So, you type HYPHEN or EN DASH and then COMBINING DIAERESIS ABOVE. I think that was David's point, that these things are always possible using combining characters, and the argument but it's easier with a precomposed character doesn't stand up to the concerns about proliferation and normalization. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
For 1. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD 2. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN I strongly suspect that current diacritics (for 1) and modifier letters (for 2) are similar enough in shape to what is required that they can be used. Are there any other characters used by Egyptologist that are so close in shape to ỉ and ʻ or ʿ that they cannot be used? Mark — Δός μοι ποῦ στῶ, καὶ κινῶ τὴν γῆν — Ἀρχιμήδης [http://www.macchiato.com] - Original Message - From: Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:50 AM Subject: Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters At 07:20 -0700 2001-09-26, Mark Davis wrote: 2. something that looks like a right half ring with a tail egyptologists have represented it with something that looks like two right half rings stacked on top of each other. 3. a capital and small glottal stop and reversed glottal stop For (2), (3), we would need a submission with documentation of usage. We do add capital/small versions of characters when there is sufficient evidence of their usage. This happens, for example, when an IPA is pressed into service in the regular orthography of a language. Pleas http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2241.pdf, my N2241: Proposal to add 6 Egyptological characters to the UCS -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Telephone +353 86 807 9169 *** Fax +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement)
Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters
Is this the same Unicode that encodes characters and not glyphs? rubyrb$B$8$e$&$$$C$A$c$s(B/rbrp(/rprtJuuitchan/rtrp)/rp/ruby Well, I guess what you say is true, I could never be the right kind of girl for you, I could never be your woman - White Town --- Original Message --- $B:9=P?M(B: Mark Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]; $B08@h(B: [EMAIL PROTECTED];Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; $BF|;~(B: 01/09/26 16:33 $B7oL>(B: Re: Egyptian Transliteration Characters For 1. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL YOD 2. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN LATIN SMALL LETTER EGYPTOLOGICAL AYIN I strongly suspect that current diacritics (for 1) and modifier letters (for 2) are similar enough in shape to what is required that they can be used. Are there any other characters used by Egyptologist that are so close in shape to i?? and ?? or ?? that they cannot be used?
