Re: Character identities

At 04:39 PM 10/28/2002 -0600, David Starner wrote: >But think of the utility if Unicode added a COMBINING SNOWCAP and >COMBINING FIRECAP! But should we combine the SNOWCAP with the ICECAP? > >(-: Unicode captures the ice-age during the global warming era! Do we have codepoints for images found

Re: Character identities

John Hudson commented. >At 02:46 10/26/2002, William Overington wrote: > >>I don't know whether you might be interested in the use of a small letter a >>with an e as an accent codified within the Private Use Area, but in case you >>might be interested, the web page is as follows. >> >>http://www.u

The comet circumflex system.

Readers interested in internationalization using Unicode might like to know that I have recently added some documents about the comet circumflex system to the web. The introduction and index page are as follows. http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~ngo/c_c0.htm The main index page of the webspa

Re: Character identities

At 18:37 10/28/2002, Doug Ewell wrote: It seems to me, as a non-font guy, that calling a font a "Unicode font" implies two things: 1. It must be based on Unicode code points. For True- and OpenType fonts, this implies a Unicode cmap; for other font technologies it implies some more-or-less equ

Re: Character identities

Doug Ewell scripsit: > 1. It must be based on Unicode code points. For True- and OpenType > fonts, this implies a Unicode cmap; for other font technologies it > implies some more-or-less equivalent mechanism. The point is that > glyphs must be associated with Unicode code points (not necessaril

Re: Character identities

All this talk about the letter "A" reminded me of something from Hofstadter: "The problem of intelligence, as I see it is to understand the fluid nature of mental categories, to understand the invariant cores of percepts such as your mother’s face, to understand the strangely flexible yet strong b

Re: Character identities

I'm pretty much in agreement with what you say, except the following: > Of course, the term "Unicode font" is also often used to mean "a font > that covers all, or nearly all, of Unicode." I would consider a Unicode font to be one that met your other conditions, aside from the repertoire. If I ha

Re: Character identities

My USD 0.02, as someone who is neither a professional typographer nor a font designer (more than one, but not quite two, different things)... Discussions about the character-glyph model often mention the "essential characteristics" of a given character. For example, a Latin capital A can be bold,

RE: Character identities

At 14:31 -0800 2002-10-28, Figge, Donald wrote: At 20:59 + 2002-10-28, Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote: On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. <...> Seems pointless to tell a lot of the fon

Re: Character identities

At 14:30 -0800 2002-10-28, Kenneth Whistler wrote: > >Hm, what if I want to make, say, snow capped Devanagari glyphs for my >hiking company in Nepal? Shouldn't I assign them to Unicode code points? That's what Private Use code positions are for. -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *

Re: Character identities

On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 01:36:08PM -0700, John Hudson wrote: > > >On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. > ><...> > >> Seems pointless to tell a lot of the fontmakers out there that they > >> sh

Re: Character identities

On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 09:36:34PM +, Michael Everson wrote: > At 20:59 + 2002-10-28, Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote: > >On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. > ><...> > >> Seems point

Re: Character identities

> >Hm, what if I want to make, say, snow capped Devanagari glyphs for my > >hiking company in Nepal? Shouldn't I assign them to Unicode code points? > > That's what Private Use code positions are for. > -- > Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com Um, Michael, I thin

Re: Character identities

At 13:36 -0700 2002-10-28, John Hudson wrote: Or are you working with some definition of 'Unicode font' other than 'font with a Unicode cmap'? It seemed to me that he was talking about fonts that had characters that weren't in Unicode at all. I don't mean precomposed vowels, but, say, fonts w

RE: Character identities

At 20:59 + 2002-10-28, Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote: >On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. ><...> >> Seems pointless to tell a lot of the fontmakers out there that they >> shouldn't wor

Re: Character identities

At 20:59 + 2002-10-28, Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote: On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. <...> Seems pointless to tell a lot of the fontmakers out there that they shouldn't worry about

Re: Character identities

On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. <...> > Seems pointless to tell a lot of the fontmakers out there that they > shouldn't worry about Unicode, because Unicode's only for standard > book fonts

Re: Character identities

On 2002.10.28, 13:09, David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Basically, any decorative or handwriting font can't be a Unicode font. <...> > Seems pointless to tell a lot of the fontmakers out there that they > shouldn't worry about Unicode, because Unicode's only for standard > book fonts Hm,

Re: Character identities

Marco Cimarosti wrote: >> There are also lots of characters that "mean" the same, but >> always (in a Unicode font in default mode) should/must >> look different. Like M and Roman Numeral One Thousand C D >> (just to take an example closer to Italy... ;-). > > Well, the first and only time I have

RE: Character identities

Kent Karlsson wrote: > > > For this reason it is quite impermissible to render the > > > combining letter small e as a diaeresis > > > > So far so good. There would be no reason for doing such a thing. > ... > > > or, for that matter, the diaeresis as a combining > > > letter small e (however, you

Copyright on gif images via http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl

I have asked this question before without answer so I am repeating again. The Unihan Database browser at http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl shows an example glyph via http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/refglyph?24-. I would like to use this image but where can I ask for the permissio

Re: Character identities

On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:21:30AM +0100, Kent Karlsson wrote: > No, the claim was that diaresis and overscript e are the same, > so the reversed case Marc is talking about is not different at all. The claim is, that for certain fonts, it is appropriate to image the a-umlaut character as an a^e. T

RE: Character identities

... > > For this reason it is quite impermissible to render the > > combining letter small e as a diaeresis > > So far so good. There would be no reason for doing such a thing. ... > > or, for that matter, the diaeresis as a combining > > letter small e (however, you see the latter version > > some

BabelPad

BabelPad, my free Unicode plain text editor for Windows has now been released. Further information is available at . BabelPad also includes input methods for a number of scripts which I am interested in, currently : Tibetan (using Exte

Re: Character identities

At 11:37 25.10.2002 -0700, Doug Ewell wrote: Marc Wilhelm Küster wrote: > As to the long s, it is not used for writing present-day German except > in rare cases, notably in some scholarly editions and in the Fraktur > script. Very few texts beyond the names of newspapers are nowadays > produced