At 19:13 2/13/2002, Patrick Andries wrote:
>There is also one in French where "e" accounts for 15,3% of letters in a
>typical text
>
>It's called "La disparition" (320 pages without an "e"), by Georges Perec.
The English one is translation of Perec's _La disparation_ by Gilbert
Adair, enti
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 08:46:31PM -0800, Yves Arrouye wrote:
> > What do you mean? I've done works for Project Gutenberg, and looked at a
> > number of books with thoughts of reducing them to ASCII. In my opinion,
> > Windows-1252 has every character that most English books will need,
>
> Especi
Patrick Andries scripsit:
> Quite a feat indeed : since "e" accounts for 13% of letters in a typical
> English text.
Indeed. It's called "Gadsby", and the author of "La disparition"
certainly knew it.
> There is also one in French where "e" accounts for 15,3% of letters in a
> typical text..
At 7:03 PM -0800 2/13/02, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>As I tried to hint at above, attempting to give this answer is at
>best possible in a fuzzy, probabilistic sense. Even such a simple
>statement that 'e' is used for English, can be misleading. There's
>at least one novel that does entirely witho
> What do you mean? I've done works for Project Gutenberg, and looked at a
> number of books with thoughts of reducing them to ASCII. In my opinion,
> Windows-1252 has every character that most English books will need,
Especially those books that you want to reduce to ASCII :-)
YA
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 06:39:30AM +0300, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
> I have not heard about official (i.e. approved by Unicode Consortium)
> Russian names of Unicode Characters. Of course, they could be constructed.
> But that implies that such names must be constructed for every official
> language
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 07:03:40PM -0800, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> This has been attempted for some sets of latin based languages. I don't
> have a link to one of the documents that do that. Main problem is that
> many *more* characters are actually used (and used quite commonly) by users
> of these
Asmus Freytag wrote:
> . There's at least one novel that does entirely without that letter,
> but is certainly in English.
Quite a feat indeed : since "e" accounts for 13% of letters in a typical
English text.
There is also one in French where "e" accounts for 15,3% of letters in a
typic
At 06:37 PM 2/11/02 +, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
>We, ASCII-age programmers, are used to considering plain text
>rendering as being injective up to binary identity. We carefully
>choose fonts that distinguish between O and 0, 1 and l. We use
>editors that warn us about non-native line endin
[apologies in advance to those who receive this multiple times]
In connection to work that Gary Simons and I have been doing in
interaction with ISO/TC 37/SC 2/WG 1, we have added some new pages to the
Ethnologue web site that present an analysis we have done of the existing
ISO 639 language
* Michael Everson
|
| I think it's clear that Unicode should give some advice as to how to
| announce encoding options in a useful way to the end user. For the
| two encodings we are discussing, may I suggest the following
| standard menu items:
|
| Unicode (Raw, UTF-16)
| Unicode (Web, UTF-8)
David Starner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 08:12:08PM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> > OK, UTF-8 is my favorite default UTF too. However, whatever
> the default is,
> > it is easier to just call it "Unicode", and call the other
> options "Unicode
> > (something else)".
> >
> > That puts on
Unicoders,
In Unicode 3.0, U+200B have the "White_space" property.
http://www.unicode.org/Public/3.0-Update/PropList-3.0.0.txt
In Unicode 3.1, U+200B have lost it's "White_space" property.
http://www.unicode.org/Public/3.1-Update/PropList-3.1.0.txt
I can't find out why. Can anyone help me?
Kin
At 14:28 -0600 2002-02-12, David Starner wrote:
>
>What happens when a user is told to save in UTF-16? What about when two
>users running different operating systems try to pass files about? And
>why would Unicode be any clearer to a naive user than UTF-16?
>
>IMO, UTF-16 is as clear as Unicode, a
* Marco Cimarosti
|
| Only if the user selects a menu like "Manual encoding settings", she
| should be presented with a choice like "International (Unicode)",
| that opposes to "Western (ISO 8859-1)", "Chinese, simplified (GB
| 2312-80)", and so on. All entries should have a generic descriptive
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
[Cross-posted from the IDN list; reply-to set to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Change it back for replies that relate specifically to IDN.]
Mark Davis wrote:
> >stringprep(NFC(x)) == stringprep(x) [does not always hold]
>
> This was brought up early in the Unicode 3.2 dev
16 matches
Mail list logo
