Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Philippe Verdy
On Monday, July 21, 2003 2:01 AM, Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 19:56 -0400 2003-07-20, Patrick Andries wrote: > > > Yahoo's title is obviously overblown ("sexed up" like the BBC says). > > And isn't *that* the meme of the moment. One idiot said it and it > spread like a virus.

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Karljürgen Feuerherm
Philippe Verdy wrote on July 21, 2003 at 1:48 AM > This one decision of the official terminology group is not stupid: it adopts a term that is now spread among French and Canadian natives, Best avoid the phrase 'Canadian natives'. Even though it might theoretically embrace all of us who were born

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Patrick Andries
- Message d'origine - De: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > At 19:56 -0400 2003-07-20, Patrick Andries wrote: > > >Obviously, the AP has found someone to say it is artificial. > > Of course, all language is artificial. Well, at least all new words that can be traced to someone ca

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Michael Everson
At 10:59 -0400 2003-07-21, Patrick Andries wrote: - Message d'origine - De: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> At 19:56 -0400 2003-07-20, Patrick Andries wrote: >Obviously, the AP has found someone to say it is artificial. Of course, all language is artificial. Well, at least all n

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Peter Kirk
On 21/07/2003 09:00, Michael Everson wrote: At 10:59 -0400 2003-07-21, Patrick Andries wrote: - Message d'origine - De: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> At 19:56 -0400 2003-07-20, Patrick Andries wrote: >Obviously, the AP has found someone to say it is artificial. Of course, al

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Karljürgen Feuerherm
Michael Everson wrote on July 21, 2003 at 12:00 > *All* words must be traced to someone. They do not grow on trees. They do so: in computer data structures , at least! ;-) K

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Michael \(michka\) Kaplan
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I don't know what the "i" in > the iLifestyle suite (iChat, iPhoto, iBook, > iThis, iThat) means. For developers, a capital "I" usually means interface -- in code certainly but then often applied in life as only geeks can do. I have fond memories of n

RE: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Jon Hanna
> eBook, e-mail, eBay, e-money, and all that gunk. > I suppose we could do without them. Even Apple's > gone weird about it. I don't know what the "i" in > the iLifestyle suite (iChat, iPhoto, iBook, > iThis, iThat) means. e-jit, iDiot, iMbecile.

OT: Interfaces and, er, facilities

2003-07-21 Thread John Cowan
Michael (michka) Kaplan scripsit: > For developers, a capital "I" usually means interface -- in code certainly > but then often applied in life as only geeks can do. For "developers" read "thralls of Microsoft". Us Java folks know that the names of interfaces properly end in "-able" or "-ible";

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Philippe Verdy
On Monday, July 21, 2003 7:16 PM, Jon Hanna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > eBook, e-mail, eBay, e-money, and all that gunk. > > I suppose we could do without them. Even Apple's > > gone weird about it. I don't know what the "i" in > > the iLifestyle suite (iChat, iPhoto, iBook, > > iThis, iThat) m

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Pim Blokland
Philippe Verdy schreef: > I'm not sure that even all English users appreciate the computer > related jargon and acronyms that their geek developers want to > force them to learn and use. Hm... Personally I feel just the opposite. I think the computer industry has taken too many normal words and f

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Marion Gunn
Scríobh "Michael \(michka\) Kaplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >I always assumed the lowercase "i" was either meant to be something similar >to devs but mean something like "information" to normal (i.e., >non-developer) types. Then, like any concept is has to be [over]used >everywhere. Maybe someone from

Re: Last Resort Glyphs (was: About the European MES-2 subset)

2003-07-21 Thread Peter_Constable
Philippe Verdy wrote on 07/20/2003 08:37:19 AM: > > What would be the purpose of encoding these? I can't think of any. > > They certainly don't need to be encoded as distinct characters to use > > in a Last Resort font. > > Mostly for documentation purpose Since Unicode is not a glyph encoding s

Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail'

2003-07-21 Thread Chris Jacobs
- Original Message - From: "Philippe Verdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [OT] French Government Bans the Term 'E-Mail' > On Monday, July 21, 2003 7:16 PM, Jon Hanna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > eBook, e-mail, eBay, e-m

Question about properties of some Code Points

2003-07-21 Thread Elisha Berns
Hi, I have a few questions about the properties and categories of some punctuation characters. A few things seem counter-intuitive so hopefully there is a clear explanation. The property set Bidi_Mirrored includes pairs of parentheses that have left and right glyphs because their meaning changes

Re: Question about properties of some Code Points

2003-07-21 Thread Chris Jacobs
> Where am I going with this? Basically what I'm after is a clean/clear > way to tell if quotation marks and parentheses (plus the other > bracketing characters such as '[' or '{' are opening or closing > punctuation. That's the real question here! How would you do that > using properties and ca

RE: Yerushala(y)im - or Biblical Hebrew

2003-07-21 Thread Jony Rosenne
It has been claimed that some errors were made in specifying the combining classes of some of the characters in the Hebrew Points and Punctuation section (U+05B0 to U+05C4) of the Hebrew block of the Unicode standard. Could someone please present a list of these errors. Jony