Doug Ewell scripsit:
Tags constructed wholly from the codes that are assigned
interpretations by this chapter do not need to be registered with
IANA before use.
Does the -ny subtag fail this criterion because RFC 3066 does not
explicitly assign the ISO 3166-2 interpretation?
Yes. The
Chris Hopkins wrote as follows.
quote
I am a new list member interested in implementing archaic, classical and
Hellenistic Greek glyphs in a Unicode font. My initial questions will be
focused on handling multiple alternate glyphs for each character, and how to
organize a font with several
Doug Ewell wrote as follows.
quote
What happened to LTag? Well, as everybody knows, the Unicode Technical
Committee strongly discourages the usage of these tags, to the point
were they were almost deprecated earlier this year. They are permitted
only in special protocols, and are certainly
Doug Ewell wrote as follows.
I'll mail it, or maybe repost it, after I finish applying a nice, THICK
coating. I'm thinking about one of those expired-shareware message
boxes where the OK button is disabled for the first five seconds.
But I'd like to get this third-subtag question resolved
Stefan Persson wrote as follows.
quote
Well, let's say that I make a plain text document and include a
mathematical formula or funtion such as cos x, it would still be legal
to use an italic x from the mathematical block, wouldn't it? This is
what those characters are intended for, right?
end
William Overington scripsit:
How should that be set in Unicode plain text? Is it to use the letters for
cos from the range U+0020 to U+007E and then use U+1D466 for the y and
U+1D465 for the x?
Just so.
I note that U+1D465 MATHEMATICAL ITALIC SMALL X in the code chart has the
following
At 08:03 -0500 2003-04-04, John Cowan wrote:
There are, strictly speaking (some typographer correct me please if I am
wrong), no italic sans serif fonts, but only slanted sans serif fonts.
Oblique
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
.
William Overington wrote,
What please is a Hellenistic monogram? I am wondering whether this is going
to be a good application of the Private Use Area, either on a permanent
basis or on a temporary basis pending making a formal encoding application.
In either case, reading about the
Doug,
Most likely because no modern computer uses a 3-byte (24-bit) internal
processing unit, and because it would be false economy for real-world
Unicode text (see (1) and (2) above).
What would be worse is to have an implementation like the old IBM 360 computers where
the 24 bit addresses
John Cowan wrote:
There are, strictly speaking (some typographer correct me please if I am
wrong), no italic sans serif fonts, but only slanted sans serif fonts.
I believe Adobe Myriad claims a true italic; the letterforms are sans
versions of standard italic letterforms, rather than obliques of
At 05:03 AM 4/4/2003, John Cowan wrote:
There are, strictly speaking (some typographer correct me please if I am
wrong), no italic sans serif fonts, but only slanted sans serif fonts.
You're wrong. There are now plenty of true italic (i.e. cursive) sans serif
fonts; it has been a couple of
John Hudson scripsit:
You're wrong. There are now plenty of true italic (i.e. cursive) sans serif
fonts; it has been a couple of decades at least since obliqued roman went
out of style for sans serif typefaces.
Ah, thanks. The old error surrenders, but never dies.
--
Do what you will,
John,
Thank you for the suggestions; I am already a member of VOLT and other font
developer lists, but have been unsuccessful in joining the Topica OpenType
list. Whatever the problem, I get no responses from Topica tech support. I
am unable to unsubscribe nor send messages to the list. If you
William,
Yes, I am very interested in the Unicode aspects of handling multiple glyphs
of one Greek character. My original thoughts were to use the PUA, but some
knowledgeable people have suggested I ask for advice on this list for ideas
before using the PUA.
Essentially, I have two issues. First
By the way, a few people have been discussing possible solutions to some of
the problems with language codes (and their relation to locales), which may
be of interest to some people here. The discussion has just been switched to
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages, which has
Peter continued:
Ken Whistler wrote on 04/02/2003 03:54:10 PM:
That isn't the only convention. I am finding several samples of
typographic
retroflex hook being used to indicate nasalisation of vowels.
Jim Allan is right. It is the *ogonek* which is used to signify
the nasalization
Kenneth Whistler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/04/2003 02:25:02 PM:
They are very
clearly the retroflex hook and not ogonek.
This last is a fallacious statement on its face.
Why you would feel that such user sense of the characters they
are using is belied by your analysis of the shape
Peter,
Why you would feel that such user sense of the characters they
are using is belied by your analysis of the shape of the hooks
used in the IJAL font is beyond me.
I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. I was not referring to their status in terms of
defining characters. I was *only*
Kenneth Whistler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 04/04/2003 05:09:25 PM:
There is another convention, admittedly far less widespread: cedilla.
I don't think this is an accepted convention.
No, not very widespread.
I think those instances where you find a
linguist publishing using vowels with
Peter,
Note that the example you posted also had an h-ogonek, so the
usage is not limited to vowels, per se.
Indeed.
(Although that particular
entity itself is a little bizarre, since you cannot really
nasalize a voiceless glottal fricative.
Then you'd be even more surprised
From _The Unicode Standard Version 3.0_, chapter 7.1, European
Alphabetic Scripts, Latin Extended-A: U+0100U+017F:
In general, characters with cedillas or ogoneks below are subject to
variable typographical usage, depending on the availability and quality
of fonts used, the technology, and the
21 matches
Mail list logo
