In the .Net Framework, the string class (System
namespace) and the System.Globalization and System.Text
namespaces *are* designed to be aware of supplementary plane
characters.
IMHO, that's a bit misleading. The String class itself does not appear
to
be
aware of SMP characters. It
At 10:49 PM 4/7/2004, Peter Constable wrote:
, and the length it reports
is the number of code units, not the number of characters or graphemes
in
the string.
True; that is documented.
However, that's very common; many APIs relating to UTF-8 would report
the number of bytes, not the number of
Is there a difference between U+66F6 and U+3ADA?
The newest UNIHAN.TXT file doesn't have a definition field for
U+66F6. The glyphs in the Unicode 4.0 book appear identical
for these two characters. One is placed with radical 72, the
other with radical 73, although UNIHAN.TXT gives both as
James,
this is the kind of thing that you should report via
our error reporting form. Here on the open list, it's
liable to get lost (no-one owns excerpting issues from
this forum).
The contact form can be found on our home page under
contact us.
A./
At 12:03 PM 4/8/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Apr 8, 2004, at 1:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a difference between U+66F6 and U+3ADA?
The newest UNIHAN.TXT file doesn't have a definition field for
U+66F6. The glyphs in the Unicode 4.0 book appear identical
for these two characters. One is placed with radical 72, the
other
Asmus Freytag wrote,
this is the kind of thing that you should report via
our error reporting form. Here on the open list, it's
liable to get lost (no-one owns excerpting issues from
this forum).
Before reporting it through proper channels, I wanted to try
to find out which kind of error it
On Apr 2, 2004, at 4:38 AM, Andrew C. West wrote:
For me 4.0.1 was a big disappointment. The much vaunted update of the
Unihan
database did not even clear up all the editorial errors in the
database, let
alone deal with the real problems of content, such as incorrect or
dubious
Mandarin,
On Apr 8, 2004, at 04:29 PM, John Jenkins wrote:
On Apr 2, 2004, at 4:38 AM, Andrew C. West wrote:
For me 4.0.1 was a big disappointment. The much vaunted update of the
Unihan
database did not even clear up all the editorial errors in the
database, let
alone deal with the real problems of
8 matches
Mail list logo
