RE: The Ruble sign has been approved
Michel Suignard, Thu, 12 Dec 2013 02:54:37 +: Given that the standard is widely adaptable, just means that U+0554 is *also* usable in western styles, without being restricted to the Cyrillic script, even if the character is encoded in a Cyrcillic block. Could everyone stop using 0554 as being a character in a Cyrillic bloc! It is 0554 ARMENIAN CAPITAL LETTER KEH. +1 As far as I know Armenia has not been yet assimilated by the Russians (although they are working hard on it ;-) Isn’t that the definition of liberation – to free something from the Cyrillic … so that it can be useful in the Western … ? Cheers to the Russians’ hard work on liberating the Armenian keh! Michel PS It was a good joke, some didn’t get the memo Leif Halvard Silli
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote: I’m already on it. Excellent. Would it be possible please for encoding to include specific official guidance, going back to a source with provenance, as to whether a glyph for the symbol in a serif font should or should not have serifs? William Overington 12 December 2013
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
In my opinion, this is going too far for the UTC. Such guidance can only come from Russian authorities for the application of its law, where it is relevant to apply it. Even for the Euro, there's ample variations allowed in Unicode, that does not affect conformance, even if there may be further restrictions on them in specific contexts. We are out of scope of TUS, unless there's a clear standard coming from law or from a national standard body, defining a clear context of use where a more precise shape design would be normatively used (and should then be present in fonts in one of the implemented variants). 2013/12/12 William_J_G Overington wjgo_10...@btinternet.com Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote: I’m already on it. Excellent. Would it be possible please for encoding to include specific official guidance, going back to a source with provenance, as to whether a glyph for the symbol in a serif font should or should not have serifs? William Overington 12 December 2013
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
On 12/12/13 15:14, William_J_G Overington wrote: Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote: I’m already on it. Excellent. Would it be possible please for encoding to include specific official guidance, going back to a source with provenance, as to whether a glyph for the symbol in a serif font should or should not have serifs? William Overington 12 December 2013 I would imagine that this is left to the discretion of the font designer, as in all other simlar currency symbols, where the style of the currency symbol follows the style of the rest of the font. -- N.
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
Le 2013-12-12 à 13:42, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com a écrit : The Euro was the first currency symbol added which was presented to the world as a logo. In the context of encoding the character, the UTC and WG2 (quite correctly) at the time made clear that what was being encoded was a generic character code that encompasses all font designs and that use of the character code would not guarantee an appearance matching the logo design. The bureaucrats were a bit hesitant at first, but very soon actual typefaces appeared and it turned out to be no problem at all having the currency symbol harmonize with the font. Same for iso-8859-15 which included the Euro. However, I don't remember if 8859-15 was done in parallel or after. Most likely after. Marc. There is no question that UTC is fully entitled to define the range of glyph representations encompassed by a character code. For example for most letters they encompass any traditional or decorative rendering, while for something like the ESTIMATED symbol, it is understood that the intent is to encode a rather specific depiction of a lower case 'e'. For currency symbols, the precedent established by long standing symbols like the $ and confirmed for the euro is that a symbol shape harmonizing with the font falls inside the glyph variation encompassed by the character code. Only if that precedent were to be disregarded for some future symbol would it be necessary for UTC to include guidance. A./ On 12/12/2013 9:29 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: In my opinion, this is going too far for the UTC. Such guidance can only come from Russian authorities for the application of its law, where it is relevant to apply it. Even for the Euro, there's ample variations allowed in Unicode, that does not affect conformance, even if there may be further restrictions on them in specific contexts. We are out of scope of TUS, unless there's a clear standard coming from law or from a national standard body, defining a clear context of use where a more precise shape design would be normatively used (and should then be present in fonts in one of the implemented variants). 2013/12/12 William_J_G Overington wjgo_10...@btinternet.com Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote: I’m already on it. Excellent. Would it be possible please for encoding to include specific official guidance, going back to a source with provenance, as to whether a glyph for the symbol in a serif font should or should not have serifs? William Overington 12 December 2013
RE: The Ruble sign has been approved
ISO/IEC 8859-15 was done in parallel (formally in SC2/WG3). Sincerely, Erkki Lähettäjä: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] Puolesta Marc Blanchet Lähetetty: 13. joulukuuta 2013 00:00 Vastaanottaja: Asmus Freytag Kopio: verd...@wanadoo.fr; William_J_G Overington; Michael Everson; unicode Unicode Discussion Aihe: Re: The Ruble sign has been approved Le 2013-12-12 à 13:42, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com a écrit : The Euro was the first currency symbol added which was presented to the world as a logo. In the context of encoding the character, the UTC and WG2 (quite correctly) at the time made clear that what was being encoded was a generic character code that encompasses all font designs and that use of the character code would not guarantee an appearance matching the logo design. The bureaucrats were a bit hesitant at first, but very soon actual typefaces appeared and it turned out to be no problem at all having the currency symbol harmonize with the font. Same for iso-8859-15 which included the Euro. However, I don't remember if 8859-15 was done in parallel or after. Most likely after. Marc. There is no question that UTC is fully entitled to define the range of glyph representations encompassed by a character code. For example for most letters they encompass any traditional or decorative rendering, while for something like the ESTIMATED symbol, it is understood that the intent is to encode a rather specific depiction of a lower case 'e'. For currency symbols, the precedent established by long standing symbols like the $ and confirmed for the euro is that a symbol shape harmonizing with the font falls inside the glyph variation encompassed by the character code. Only if that precedent were to be disregarded for some future symbol would it be necessary for UTC to include guidance. A./ On 12/12/2013 9:29 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: In my opinion, this is going too far for the UTC. Such guidance can only come from Russian authorities for the application of its law, where it is relevant to apply it. Even for the Euro, there's ample variations allowed in Unicode, that does not affect conformance, even if there may be further restrictions on them in specific contexts. We are out of scope of TUS, unless there's a clear standard coming from law or from a national standard body, defining a clear context of use where a more precise shape design would be normatively used (and should then be present in fonts in one of the implemented variants). 2013/12/12 William_J_G Overington wjgo_10...@btinternet.com Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote: Im already on it. Excellent. Would it be possible please for encoding to include specific official guidance, going back to a source with provenance, as to whether a glyph for the symbol in a serif font should or should not have serifs? William Overington 12 December 2013
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
On 12/12/2013 9:32 PM, Erkki I Kolehmainen wrote: ISO/IEC 8859-15 was done in parallel (formally in SC2/WG3). As many experts from WG3 took part in WG2 meetings a common stance is not surprising and, instead, deliberate. A./ Sincerely, Erkki *Lähettäjä:*unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] *Puolesta *Marc Blanchet *Lähetetty:* 13. joulukuuta 2013 00:00 *Vastaanottaja:* Asmus Freytag *Kopio:* verd...@wanadoo.fr; William_J_G Overington; Michael Everson; unicode Unicode Discussion *Aihe:* Re: The Ruble sign has been approved Le 2013-12-12 à 13:42, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com mailto:asm...@ix.netcom.com a écrit : The Euro was the first currency symbol added which was presented to the world as a logo. In the context of encoding the character, the UTC and WG2 (quite correctly) at the time made clear that what was being encoded was a generic character code that encompasses all font designs and that use of the character code would not guarantee an appearance matching the logo design. The bureaucrats were a bit hesitant at first, but very soon actual typefaces appeared and it turned out to be no problem at all having the currency symbol harmonize with the font. Same for iso-8859-15 which included the Euro. However, I don't remember if 8859-15 was done in parallel or after. Most likely after. Marc. There is no question that UTC is fully entitled to define the range of glyph representations encompassed by a character code. For example for most letters they encompass any traditional or decorative rendering, while for something like the ESTIMATED symbol, it is understood that the intent is to encode a rather specific depiction of a lower case 'e'. For currency symbols, the precedent established by long standing symbols like the $ and confirmed for the euro is that a symbol shape harmonizing with the font falls inside the glyph variation encompassed by the character code. Only if that precedent were to be disregarded for some future symbol would it be necessary for UTC to include guidance. A./ On 12/12/2013 9:29 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: In my opinion, this is going too far for the UTC. Such guidance can only come from Russian authorities for the application of its law, where it is relevant to apply it. Even for the Euro, there's ample variations allowed in Unicode, that does not affect conformance, even if there may be further restrictions on them in specific contexts. We are out of scope of TUS, unless there's a clear standard coming from law or from a national standard body, defining a clear context of use where a more precise shape design would be normatively used (and should then be present in fonts in one of the implemented variants). 2013/12/12 William_J_G Overington wjgo_10...@btinternet.com mailto:wjgo_10...@btinternet.com Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com mailto:ever...@evertype.com wrote: I’m already on it. Excellent. Would it be possible please for encoding to include specific official guidance, going back to a source with provenance, as to whether a glyph for the symbol in a serif font should or should not have serifs? William Overington 12 December 2013
The Ruble sign has been approved
The board of directors of the Central Bank of Russia has [finally] approved the de facto standard ruble sign. http://lenta.ru/news/2013/12/11/symbol/ Leo
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
Fortunately, we have it already encoded at U+0554 ;-) On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Leo Broukhis l...@mailcom.com wrote: The board of directors of the Central Bank of Russia has [finally] approved the de facto standard ruble sign. http://lenta.ru/news/2013/12/11/symbol/ Leo
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
In Russia... The de facto standard ruble sign approves the board of directors... ;) On Dec 11, 2013, at 8:11 AM, Leo Broukhis l...@mailcom.com wrote: The board of directors of the Central Bank of Russia has [finally] approved the de facto standard ruble sign. http://lenta.ru/news/2013/12/11/symbol/ Leo
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
Thank you! Leo On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Michael Everson ever...@evertype.comwrote: I’m already on it. On 11 Dec 2013, at 23:51, Leo Broukhis l...@mailcom.com wrote: The board of directors of the Central Bank of Russia has [finally] approved the de facto standard ruble sign. http://lenta.ru/news/2013/12/11/symbol/ Leo Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Re: The Ruble sign has been approved
2013/12/12 Leo Broukhis l...@mailcom.com Joking aside, the ruble sign is intended as a character adaptable to Western-style typefaces (roman/italic, serif/sanserif, etc), and U+0554 doesn't easily lend itself to that. Given that the standard is widely adaptable, just means that U+0554 is *also* usable in western styles, without being restricted to the Cyrillic script, even if the character is encoded in a Cyrcillic block. This just means a change in a non-normative property, not a reencoding. A Ruble will remain a Ruble in all scripts, just like the Euro symbol, or the Bath symbol. Of course this does not preclude the possible future need of glyph distinctions using variation selectors, where it would make sense, but for now, all usages are linked to the same currency within all its glyphic variations, even if the default glyph shown in UTC charts uses the normalized form. Then each font designed for some style in a given script will adapt their glyph mapped by default for its own need, including adaptation of relative metrics while the normative glyph design is not really changed. One thing we could think about: some currencies have a normative glyph design, some others not. The normative form should have an encoding with its 1st variation selector, when the font would be free to adapt the default glyph (used without the variation selector) more freely according to its general design. So U+20AC,VS1 would be an Euro with its normative glyph design, but U+20AC alone would continue to be adaptable. Same thing for U+0554 with the generic Ruble (but U+0554,VS1 would be the current Russian Ruble glyph only, excluding other Rubles used elsewhere or in other periods of history). Same thing for the Bath, the Won (may be two possible designs between North and South Korea), the Yuan, the Yen (depending on evolutions of the JIS standards), or even the Dollar (or historic Peso or Thaller), that we will not reencode.
RE: The Ruble sign has been approved
Given that the standard is widely adaptable, just means that U+0554 is *also* usable in western styles, without being restricted to the Cyrillic script, even if the character is encoded in a Cyrcillic block. Could everyone stop using 0554 as being a character in a Cyrillic bloc! It is 0554 ARMENIAN CAPITAL LETTER KEH. As far as I know Armenia has not been yet assimilated by the Russians (although they are working hard on it ;-) Michel PS It was a good joke, some didn't get the memo
