Probably a dumb question, but how come nobody's invented "UTF-24" yet? I
just made that up, it's not an official standard, but one could easily
define UTF-24 as UTF-32 with the most-significant byte (which is always
zero) removed, hence all characters are stored in exactly three bytes and
all a
John Hudson wrote:
Philippe Verdy wrote:
Is there a way outside OpenType for other system vendors than
Microsoft and Apple? This standard loks more and more proprietary...
It has always been a proprietary font format. It has never been
anything but proprietary.
John Hudson
wITH 'it' you refer t
Title: RE: Nicest UTF
Doug Ewell wrote:
> RE: Nicest UTFLars Kristan wrote:
>
> >> I think UTF8 would be the nicest UTF.
> >
> > I agree. But not for reasons you mentioned. There is one other
> > important advantage: UTF-8 is stored in a way that permits storing
> > invalid sequences. I will
Mark E. Shoulson wrote at 7:20 PM on Saturday, December 4, 2004:
>I would say that pointing
>one text with the vowels of another, without regard for discrepencies in
>character-count, constitutes an abuse of the Hebrew orthography, and
>shouldn't be considered "normal" usage that must be suppor
Arcane Jill wrote:
> Probably a dumb question, but how come nobody's invented "UTF-24" yet?
> I just made that up, it's not an official standard, but one could
> easily define UTF-24 as UTF-32 with the most-significant byte (which
> is always zero) removed, hence all characters are stored in exac
On 06/12/2004 00:54, Chris Jacobs wrote:
It may appear to your eyes to be an abuse of the orthography, just as to
others's eyes the distinct Qamats Qatan which you proposed seems to be
an abuse of the orthography. Nevertheless, both these kinds of
discrepancies and Qamats Qatan are actually used in
Peter R. Mueller-Roemer wrote:
> The Unicode-Standard I hope is Open in the sense that any font that is
> designed to this standard may call itself a unicode-font (complete or
> partial ...).
>
> Unicode has a great potential to remove the language-specific
> boundaries from web-communication, bu
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Peter R. Mueller-Roemer
> > It has always been a proprietary font format. It has never been
> > anything but proprietary.
> wITH 'it' you refer to OpenType ? So OpentType are Type-faces= fonts
> that are only open by leaving tech
From some discussions here i learned that Arial Unicode MS contains
about 50.000 glyphs,
which is about the size of characters encoded in Unicode 2.0 and was
shipped the last
time bundled with Office for Windows 2003.
A Pan-Unicode-Font is a beautiful idea.
Why Microsoft/Monotype stopped the dev
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Dean Snyder
> >I would say that pointing
> >one text with the vowels of another, without regard for discrepencies
in
> >character-count, constitutes an abuse of the Hebrew orthography, and
> >shouldn't be considered "normal" usage
Asmus Freytag wrote:
> A simplistic model of the 'cost' for UTF-16 over UTF-32 would consider
> 3) additional cost of accessing 16-bit registers (per character)
> For many processors, item 3 is not an issue.
I do not know, I only know of a few of them; for example, I do not know how
Alpha or Spa
Asmus Freytag wrote:
A simplistic model of the 'cost' for UTF-16 over UTF-32 would consider
1) 1 extra test per character (to see whether it's a surrogate)
In my experience with tuning a fair amount of utf-16 software, this test
takes pretty close to zero time. All modern processors have branch a
> I suspect that font vendors generally do not use the term "unicode-font"
> as it is ambiguous: the intent would be to mean that the font comforms
> to Unicode encoding, but most customers out there would understand it to
> mean that it covers all the characters in Unicode. For the most part,
> f
Lars Kristan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> This is simply what you have to do. You cannot convert the data
>> into Unicode in a way that says "I don't know how to convert this
>> data into Unicode." You must either convert it properly, or leave
>> the data in its original encoding (properly marke
On 06/12/2004 17:41, Peter Constable wrote:
...
At this point, I would ask that people move from voicing critiques and
stating inadequacy to making concrete proposals that identify precisely
what is inadequate and precisely how that can be remedied.
I tried to do this about a week ago, on the He
RE: Nicest UTFLars Kristan wrote:
>> I could not disagree more with the basic premise of Lars' post. It
>> is a fundamental and critical mistake to try to "extend" Unicode with
>> non-standard code unit sequences to handle data that cannot be, or
>> has not been, converted to Unicode from a legac
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Johannes Bergerhausen
> A Pan-Unicode-Font is a beautiful idea.
>
> Why Microsoft/Monotype stopped the developpement of further versions?
Well, I cannot say that there will be no further development of Arial
Unicode MS. However,
Peter R. Mueller-Roemer wrote:
wITH 'it' you refer to OpenType ? So OpentType are Type-faces= fonts
that are only open by leaving technical details unrestricted to
font-designers, text-processing-software?
Then it's name is another MISNOMER (the word Open can't be made
proprietary by itself, so
Voir http://www.garamonpatrimoine.org/
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Doug Ewell scripsit:
> > Now suppose you have a UNIX filesystem, containing filenames in a
> > legacy encoding (possibly even more than one). If one wants to switch
> > to UTF-8 filenames, what is one supposed to do? Convert all filenames
> > to UTF-8?
>
> Well, yes. Doesn't the file system dict
John Cowan wrote:
> Windows filesystems do know what encoding they use. But a filename on
> a Unix(oid) file system is a mere sequence of octets, of which only 00
> and 2F are interpreted. (Filenames containing 20, and especially 0A,
> are annoying to handle with standard tools, but not illegal
Michael Everson a écrit :
Voir http://www.garamonpatrimoine.org/
Note the use of Unicode in http://www.garamonpatrimoine.org/petition.html
P. A.
- Original Message -
From: "Arcane Jill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Probably a dumb question, but how come nobody's invented "UTF-24" yet? I
just made that up, it's not an official standard, but one could easily
define UTF-24 as UTF-32 with the most-significant byte (which is always
zero) remo
Elaine Keown
in beautiful Vancouver, B.C.
Hi,
I wrote 3 Hebrew diacritics proposals between
May-July.
One of them was incorrectly entered in the WG2 online
listing. It needs the title below, which includes the
word 'Samaritan.' The WG2 listing completely
misidentifies the proposa
From: "E. Keown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I wrote 3 Hebrew diacritics proposals between
May-July. (...)
1. Proposal to add Samaritan Pointing to the UCS
http://www.lashonkodesh.org/samarpro.pdf
WG2 number: N2748
2. Proposal to add Palestinian Pointing to ISO/IEC 10646
http://www.lashonkodesh.org/palpr
E. Keown wrote:
Elaine Keown
in beautiful Vancouver, B.C.
Hi,
I wrote 3 Hebrew diacritics proposals between
May-July.
One of them was incorrectly entered in the WG2 online
listing. It needs the title below, which includes the
word 'Samaritan.' The WG2 listing completely
misidentifies
On Dec 6, 2004, at 10:23 AM, Johannes Bergerhausen wrote:
From some discussions here i learned that Arial Unicode MS contains
about 50.000 glyphs,
which is about the size of characters encoded in Unicode 2.0 and was
shipped the last
time bundled with Office for Windows 2003.
A Pan-Unicode-Font
(Sorry for sending this twice, Marcin.)
"Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk" writes:
> UTF-8 is poorly suitable for internal processing of strings in a
> modern programming language (i.e. one which doesn't already have a
> pile of legacy functions working of bytes, but which can be designed
> to make U
E. Keown wrote:
Elaine in Vancouver
Dear Mark:
Thanks, I guess.
This is the one I'm going to comment on, since it's
the one I know best.
I know that Michael Everson and I are working on a
Samaritan proposal,
It appears to me that my proposal came first, no? By
some months...I hav
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of E. Keown
> So what's the significance of what you're saying,
> politically?
Please explain this question: what is political about this?
Peter Constable
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
I don't know. I try to avoid politics, if possible. The significance
of what I'm saying is that you have made a good start in your proposal,
that it has some shortcomings, and that I hope to be able to help put
something more complete together.
It would be great if ther
I hope you also get a good Samaritan to participate.
Jony
32 matches
Mail list logo
