- Original Message -
From: Asmus Freytag [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ligatures in use in Fracktur are entirely missing. For example, ch is
a mandatory ligature there.
It doesn't matter whether a ligature is mandatory or not. Ligatures should
not be encoded _at all_, and these encoded in the
On 01/03/2004 00:18, Asomiddin Atoev wrote:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am emailing on behalf of the Tajikistani state
working group on localizing software for Tajik
language. Could you please kindly guide us to be in
right direction. What shall be the procedure of
standartization of alphabet symbols?
Hello Aso,
2004-03-01T11:18:34+03:00 Asomiddin Atoev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am emailing on behalf of the Tajikistani state
working group on localizing software for Tajik
language. Could you please kindly guide us to be in
right direction. What shall be the procedure of
standartization
Dear all,
Is there any where (on the Unicode site or elsewhere) I can view the
proposed 26 extended Arabic letters for West African languages, Jawi and
Moroccan Arabic that is mentioned in the pipeline table
http://www.unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html?
Thank you and best wishes,
Idris
Title: What's in a wchar_t string on unix?
Hi, all
This may be an FAQ, but I couldn't find the answer on unicode.org.
It seems that most flavours of unix define wchar_t to be 4 bytes. If the locale is set to be Unicode, what's in a wchar_t string? Is it UTF-32, or UTF-16 with the code
I suggest that any confidential and contain privileged or copyright
information better not be posted to a public list.
I hope the rules of this list preclude such provisions. If not, they should.
Jony
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
On 01/03/2004 00:18, Asomiddin Atoev wrote:
I am emailing on behalf of the Tajikistani state
working group on localizing software for Tajik
language. Could you please kindly guide us to be in
right direction. What shall be the procedure of
standartization of alphabet symbols? Tajik alphabet
I
Rick Cameron wrote on 3/1/2004, 2:13 PM:
Hi, all
This may be an FAQ,
but I couldn't find the answer on unicode.org.
The reason is there are
"NO answer" to the question you ask.
It seems that most
flavours of
unix define wchar_t to be 4 bytes.
Depend on which UNIX
What's in a wchar_t string on unix?What you'll put or find in wchar_t is
application dependant. But there's only a guarantee to find a single code unit
(not necessarily a codepoint) for characters encoded in the source and compiled
with the appropriate source charset. But this charset is not
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I understand that there have been previous attempts to define a new or
extended Cyrillic 8-but character set supporting Central Asian
languages, but that such proposals have been rejected. I hardly think
that Aso would have turned to the Unicode list if he
On 01/03/2004 13:19, Philippe Verdy wrote:
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I understand that there have been previous attempts to define a new or
extended Cyrillic 8-but character set supporting Central Asian
languages, but that such proposals have been rejected. I hardly think
that Aso
OK, I guess I
need to be more precise in my question.
For
each of the popular unices (Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and - if
possible - linux), can anyone answer the following question:
Assuming that the locale is set to Unicode, what
is in a wchar_t string? Is it UTF-32 or pseudo-UTF-16 (i.e.
On 01/03/2004 12:30, Philippe Verdy wrote:
On 01/03/2004 00:18, Asomiddin Atoev wrote:
I am emailing on behalf of the Tajikistani state
working group on localizing software for Tajik
language. Could you please kindly guide us to be in
right direction. What shall be the procedure of
On 01/03/2004 14:24, Philippe Verdy wrote:
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aha, here's my way to get the characters I want into Unicode although
they have been rejected! I find some near-bankrupt island state and
persuade (with a little financial lubrication) its government to set up
an
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The cost of software is unlikely to be a serious issue. I haven't been
to Tajikistan, but in many countries in that region almost any software
is available for the cost of copying a CD. As a result Windows XP and
Office XP (probably now 2003) are in general
On 01/03/2004 14:57, Philippe Verdy wrote:
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The cost of software is unlikely to be a serious issue. I haven't been
to Tajikistan, but in many countries in that region almost any software
is available for the cost of copying a CD. As a result Windows XP and
On Mar 1, 2004, at 3:57 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
There are LOTS of legacy software (not necessarily standard OS or
office
software, but also private softwares used in administrations, banks,
and various
private organizations, etc...) which are needed today and will need to
continue
to work
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Windows 2000/XP and Office need no adaptation, just fonts and keyboards.
Well, the menus do need localisation, and obviously that is a
significant issue (although I guess most Tajiks know or can easily learn
the Russian for File, View, Help etc).
Issues of
There are LOTS of legacy software (not necessarily standard OS or office
software, but also private softwares used in administrations, banks, and
various
private organizations, etc...) which are needed today and will need to
continue
to work for many years as there's not a lot money to adapt
There sure is a lot of blather going back and forth base on *guesses* at
what was being asked. And the more the thread continues, I think the
further it is probably moving away from helping the person that asked
the original question.
PK and PV, before responding to one another any further,
Aso:
Could you please clarify exactly what you are looking for help with.
- Are you looking for information on standardizing orthographic usage
within a community? (I suspect not.)
- Are you wanting to find out whether a particular orthography for Tajik
is supported in Unicode and, if not,
Adam Twardoch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It doesn't matter whether a ligature is mandatory or not. Ligatures should
not be encoded _at all_, and these encoded in the Alphabetic Presentation
Forms are an uncomfortable compromise, and exception.
I completely accept that the vast majority of
But can someone explain to me why a ligatures such as ct which CANNOT be
accurately decomposed into individual characters (at least, it can't if
it's designed PROPERLY) shouldn't be encoded in its own right?
Non-decomposability is the special feature of all the ligatures currently
23 matches
Mail list logo
