wrote:
> I am trying to include Hebrew into a Java applet and I have a
> question. Sometimes you
> need to include a letter with a dash underneath.
> For example, on page:
> http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0590.pdf you may want to
> combine \u05D0 and \u05B7 into one
> character. Is it possi
Philippe Verdy continued:
> From: "Mark Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > From: "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > On 2003.05.25, 00:00, Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > even if the Dutch language considers it as a single letter, in a
> > > > way similar to the Sp
Thomas Widmann continued:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > > >Yes, I think you're right that an annotation is best -- but only
> > > >if EMPTY SET is indeed the right character. I'm increasingly of
> > > >the opinion that a different character might be needed.
> > >
> > > I would disagree.
> >
Theodore Smith wrote:
> My first reaction, is that the logos don't look like they compare to
> other logos in terms of style. For example "Mac OSX" logos, XML logos,
> and that generally do look more snazzy.
They were loosely modelled on the W3C HTML validation logo, which
is comparable, in som
One minor correction:
> However, it's true that ECMAScript will allow you to create invalide
Unicode strings.
More precisely, ECMAScript (and other systems) will allow you to
create 16-bit Unicode strings that are not UTF-16.
See Section 2.7 in http://www.unicode.org/book/preview/ch02.pdf.
Mark
A logo with a yellow or light blue or pale green background would be more appealing on
various bright backgrounds. I also think that the grey logo is too dark and difficult
to red, and the pink logo is quite strange.
The red of the checkmark should contrast more by using asaturated color, and th
> -Original Message-
> Date/Time:Sun May 25 18:34:01 EDT 2003
> Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Report Type: Problems / Feedback about website
>
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to include Hebrew into a Java applet and I have a
> question. Sometimes you
> need to include a letter with
From: "Markus Scherer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Paul Hastings wrote:
> > would it be correct to say that javascript "natively" supports unicode?
>
> ECMAScript, of which JavaScript and JScript are implementations, is defined on
> 16-bit Unicode
> scripts and using 16-bit Unicode strings.
>
> In ot
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > >Yes, I think you're right that an annotation is best -- but only
> > >if EMPTY SET is indeed the right character. I'm increasingly of
> > >the opinion that a different character might be needed.
> >
> > I would disagree.
>
> As would I.
Oh dear, if you both disag
My first reaction, is that the logos don't look like they compare to
other logos in terms of style. For example "Mac OSX" logos, XML logos,
and that generally do look more snazzy.
My second reaction is that I hope I haven't annoyed anyone.
My third was that I probably ought to say it anyhow. Ma
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Philippe Verdy wrote on 05/27/2003 11:50:39 AM:
>
> > Don't speak about overwriting sequences using Backspace in Unicode!
>
> I wasn't; I was talking about typewriters, though the comparable thing was
> done in the era of Wordstar and daisy wheel / dot matrix printers.
From: "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 2003.05.25, 00:00, Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > even if the Dutch language considers it as a single letter, in a
> > way similar to the Spanish "ch"
>
> I see one major difference: When you apply extra wide inter-char
> d
From: "Mark Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On 2003.05.25, 00:00, Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > even if the Dutch language considers it as a single letter, in a
> > > way similar to the Spanish "ch"
> >
> > I see one major di
Title: Announcement: New Unicode Savvy Logo
Dear Unicoders,
Very often the Unicode Consortium has received requests from webmasters who wished to indicate with a logo or banner that their site supports or uses Unicode. For such purposes we have developed two logos that can be freely display
Paul Hastings wrote:
would it be correct to say that javascript "natively" supports unicode?
ECMAScript, of which JavaScript and JScript are implementations, is defined on 16-bit Unicode
scripts and using 16-bit Unicode strings.
In other words, the basic encoding support is there, but there are b
Peter Constable wrote:
> > If you want an overriding slash, use now the COMBINING STROKE
> > diacritic defined in Unicode (look in the U+3XX page, I can't
> > remember the codepoint exactly but this should be U+0337 for the
> > short one normally used on small letters, or U+0338 for the long one
>
Well, I don't know who told you, but WORD JOINER only affects
linebreak behavior, not intercharacter spacing.
Mark
__
http://www.macchiato.com
► “Eppur si muove” ◄
- Original Message -
From: "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PRO
Andrew C. West wrote on 05/27/2003 11:50:03 AM:
> In which case, although no-one has mentioned it thusfar, would U+0031
(DIGIT
> ZERO), U+0338 (COMBINING LONG SOLIDUS OVERLAY) be more correct ?
>
> It does not combine in most fonts, looks dreadful in others (e.g.
> Arial Unicode
> MS)...
> The d
Philippe Verdy wrote on 05/27/2003 11:50:39 AM:
> Don't speak about overwriting sequences using Backspace in Unicode!
I wasn't; I was talking about typewriters, though the comparable thing was
done in the era of Wordstar and daisy wheel / dot matrix printers.
> If you want an overriding slash,
Francois Yergeau scripsit:
> But I do get a 403 D)Bésolé going to just http://pages.infinit.net (i.e.
> dropping the /hapax/ bit). Is that what you did?
Perhaps so; it works for me now, at any rate.
--
"No, John. I want formats that are actually John Cowan
useful, rather than over-feat
On 2003.05.25, 00:00, Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> even if the Dutch language considers it as a single letter, in a
> way similar to the Spanish "ch"
I see one major difference: When you apply extra wide inter-char
distance, you (should) get, f.i.:
K o r t r ij k and not
John Cowan wrote:
> Francois Yergeau scripsit:
>
> > Good idea. The data is available (up to 3.2, not yet 4.0). See
> > http://pages.infinit.net/hapax/.
>
> Nope. That page politely explains "Désolé! L'accès )Bà cette
> ressource est interdite."
Interesting. It does work from here.
But
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I would NOT recommend using a math symbol for this. Especially
> considering
> > the above. The CAPITAL O WITH STROKE (Ø) is probably better.
>
> It is not better. If anything might be better, it would be a digit zero
> from a font that has a slash through it. In th
Philippe Verdy scripsit:
> The message is in French: it says (using the UTF-8 encoding): "D)Bésolé! L'accès à
> cette ressource est interdit." (note the typo corrected here, because "interdite" is
> femine but does not comply with the masculine genre of "accès").
Actually that's Latin-1 encodi
On Tue, 27 May 2003 09:47:46 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It is not better. If anything might be better, it would be a digit zero
> from a font that has a slash through it. In the past, linguists have
> probably put this into their documents by typing zero, backspacing and
> typing /, or form
Francois Yergeau scripsit:
> Good idea. The data is available (up to 3.2, not yet 4.0). See
> http://pages.infinit.net/hapax/.
Nope. That page politely explains "Désolé! L'accès )Bà cette
ressource est interdite."
Somehow I doubt that the server is actually "désolé", but there is no
doubt th
26 matches
Mail list logo
