> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Doug Ewell
> Seeing that Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian have been given their own
> separate ISO 639 codes, for almost purely political reasons (they are
> dialects), I doubt it's necessary to worry about erasing the political
> d
Tex Texin wrote:
However, I am curious as to whether some Users might read/write their names
using compatibility characters (esp. in ideographic markets) and object to the
characters being normalized through nfkc.
There is a further problem there, because the CJK compatibility
characters have a
Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote:
> As for your question: both governments (and "their" people), while
> keeping their armies and recyprocal independence (for now), agree
> that it is the same language, even if they may some day disagree about
> its name. (E.g., the 19th cent. saw a number of war
Philippe Verdy wrote:
> Shamely,
I wish I knew which real English word you mean by this. "Shamefully"?
"Sadly"? "Unfortunately"? "Embarrassingly"?
> the idea of "block-level" and "inline" elements is specific to HTML,
> but HTML today is an application of XML, and the problem must be
> solve
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin
> protective and patronizing, and be then offensive for real. PC does
> back fire very often.)
I do??! :-0
Peter Constable
W liście z sob, 14-08-2004, godz. 12:35 +0200, Philippe Verdy napisał:
> Simply because, for both Unicode and ISO/IEC 10646, the character
> model includes the fact that ANY base character forms a combining
> character sequence with ANY following combining character or ZW(N)J
> character.
Shouldn
On 2004.08.13, 22:47, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It should be careful to listen to users from small countries rather
> than impose on them a western guess about a situation
Moldavia and Roumania are both "western". And not really that small.
And both have an ISO representative, or at
From: "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 2004.08.11, 18:58, Mike Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Better yet, have a generic mechanism which allows you to build
>
> Even better yet: Have the WC3 rephrase their demand that no element
> should start with a defective sequence
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> No. There may have been an ambiguity there which you grasped at, but
> its roots were not deep, and the text will be altered. ZWNJ and ZWJ
> are intended for cursive scripts like Arabic and Brahmic (...)
Hic! Wasn't ZWNJ also defined to control ligatur
9 matches
Mail list logo
