As the Unicode Consortium invited public comments on the possible
deprecation of plane 14 tag characters, will the Unicode Consortium be
making a prompt public statement of the result of the review as soon as the
present meeting of the Unicode Technical Committee is completed, or even
earlier if th
John Hudson wrote as follows.
>At 05:26 11/7/2002, Michael Everson wrote:
>
>>Please don't. William, no one really wanted you to make a .notdef glyph.
>>John was pulling your leg. Sorry I responded to the matter. Please don't
>>waste your time and ours by writing up a case history.
Thank you for
Michael Everson wrote:
> John was pulling your leg. Sorry I responded to the matter.
John Hudson wrote:
> I was indeed pulling his leg, but I also knew that he would
> actually go off and do it.
William Overington wrote:
> Well, you claim that now! At the time it appeared as a
> genuine sugge
Thomas Chan wrote:
> GETA MARK is also ambiguous to Chinese readers; an "M"-sized WHITE SQUARE
> or WHITE CIRCLE (or LARGE CIRCLE) are more familiar.
>
Thomas is right, the Geta mark is a Japanese innovation, and is totally unknown
in Chinese contexts.
> I don't think the distinction
> between
At 12:40 +0100 2002-11-08, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
I must add that this glyph has an internationalisation problem. The same
concept which the English express with the idiomatic phrase "to pull
someone's leg", in other languages is expressed by different allegories.
Italians, for instance, pull a d
Marco Cimarosti suggests:
U+E666 SYMBOL FOR JUST PULLING YOUR LEG
I know it's off the topic, but why is it that in an html page
produces, the character U+84A8, meaning qian, 'luxuriant vegetation' ?
In fact pqr; has the same effect, where p, q, r are any numbers.
Something odd in my IE6 ?
Michael Everson wrote:
> The, ah, tail?
Hem, slightly closer to the legs.
_ Marco
William Overington
wrote:
> As the Unicode Consortium invited public comments on the possible
> deprecation of plane 14 tag characters, will the Unicode Consortium be
> making a prompt public statement of the result of the review as soon
> as the present meeting of the Unicode Technical Committee
Hi,
as I've learnt in the recent thread about ligatures, Unicode does not
encode glyphs but characters. Ligatures and special glyphs to be used
for a character at the end of a word are considered presentation forms
and won't be encoded or at least deprecated.
Why is the long form of the small lat
> Why is the long form of the small latin letter s considered a
> character in its own right?
Many of the very low codepoints are defned for compatibility reasons
(e.g. all the accented characters, which can all be represented as
the base letter + combining diacritics). Of course a fraktur font
ma
I like to think of the long s as similar to the final sigma. Nobody
thinks that final sigma should be a presentation form of sigma.
Nobody really uses long s in modern Roman typography, and it's a lot
more convenient to have this as a separate character for the
nonce-uses that it has than to ex
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Lotze" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 5:37 PM
Subject: Is long s a presentation form?
> Why is the long form of the small latin letter s considered a character
> in its own right?
Because its usage in some lan
Thomas Lotze scripsit:
> Why is the LATIN SMALL LETTER LONG S considered a character
> in its own right?
>
> At least the way the two s's are used in German, they seem to act like a
> classical pair of representation forms of one single character: if the
> long s is present in the font, it is us
The long s is indeed a variant of short s. In general it is used in the
middle of a word, when used, while short s is used at the end of a word,
but exceptions occur in various scribal traditions, mostly when s occurs
at the end of a compound in a compound word. Compare modern German where
ß (a l
> -Original Message-
>
> Date/Time:Fri Nov 8 09:05:40 EST 2002
> Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Report Type: Other Question, Problem, or Feedback
>
> Hello
>
> I just wanted to know how much space in bytes the Latin-1
> characters such as the german umlaut characters take up
At 5:22 pm + 8/11/02, Michael Everson wrote:
I like to think of the long s as similar to the final sigma. Nobody
thinks that final sigma should be a presentation form of sigma.
Nobody really uses long s in modern Roman typography, and it's a lot
more convenient to have this as a separate c
- Original Message -
From: "Magda Danish (Unicode)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:17 PM
Subject: Question: the german umlaut
> > I just wanted to know how much space in bytes the Latin-1
> > characters such as the german umlaut characters
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Magda Danish (Unicode) wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> >
> > Date/Time:Fri Nov 8 09:05:40 EST 2002
> > Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Report Type: Other Question, Problem, or Feedback
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > I just wanted to know how much space in byte
I like to think of the long s as similar to the final sigma. Nobody
thinks that final sigma should be a presentation form of sigma.
Actually, I do, given an ideal encoding system without any compatibility
compromises. I think that the presence of the separate final and medial
sigma codepoi
Hi folks,
A problem was signaled in the Microsoft VOLT mailing list (this list
should be dedicated to typographic, but it appears that it deals
more with Indic scripts, because VOLT is the MS tool to use to encode
OpenType informations in a font, which in turn is required to display
Indic scripts
20 matches
Mail list logo
