Imitating the difficult-to-learn Windows system for 'multiple
diacriticals' should IMHO be offered as an option, but not as the only
option. The ease with which diacriticals can be combined by means of
xkb/Compose could be a 'Linux selling point' in the academic world.
BTW I am now terribly confus
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 21:58 +0100, Jan Willem Stumpel wrote:
> Imitating the difficult-to-learn Windows system for 'multiple
> diacriticals' should IMHO be offered as an option, but not as the only
I am not sure what complexities the Windows keyboard layout has that
make it difficult to re-impleme
Την Mon, 06 Feb 2006 21:58:13 +0100,ο(η) Jan Willem Stumpel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> έγραψε/wrote:
Imitating the difficult-to-learn Windows system for 'multiple
diacriticals' should IMHO be offered as an option, but not as the only
option. The ease with which diacriticals can be combined by means o
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 01:35:40AM +0200, ? wrote:
> >-- Many (maybe most) font creators made different glyphs for oxia
> > and tonos (although others did not, see the Gentium font), because
> > they were "looking at unicode". But, surely, that was the correct
> > place t
I'm trying to decide on the correct way to assign ctype classes to
UCS, and not sure if there's any consensus on the correct way. My idea
so far is:
Lu -> upper
Ll -> lower
Lt -> alpha
Lm -> alpha
Lo -> alpha
Mn -> alpha
Mc -> alpha
Me -> (none) ???
Nd -> digit
Nl -> (none)
No -> (none)
Zs -> s
