Re: Emoji (was: Re: Preparing a proposal for encoding a portable interpretable object code into Unicode)

Thank you for your reply. On Friday 4 June 2010, Michael Everson wrote: > ... who do you think needs to know this kind of detail? Not a one of us, I am > sure, cares about the number of pixels in the Wikipedia graphic. Well, actually I mentioned the number of pixels for the purpose of ide

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Hi I tend to agree with the arguments of Doug and Hans. From: Doug Ewell (d...@ewellic.org) Date: Fri Jun 04 2010 - 14:35:15 CDT > "Luke-Jr" wrote: >> Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should base 16 be >> denied unique characters? > The Roman numeral character

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 05:40:48 pm Doug Ewell wrote: > "Luke-Jr" wrote: > >> Shouldn't this be an FAQ? > > > > If it's Frequent, shouldn't that imply there's enough people who want > > it to warrant inclusion in Unicode? ;) > > It means there are enough people who are misinformed about whether a

Re: Overloading Unicode

Doug, I'm not sure about what you mean by overloading. To the point, There are usage samples, there were/are publications/magazines even run by the then leader of the current chief minister of Tamil Nadu state. There are usage samples. Widespread!, this will be done eventually as with other

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Mark E. Shoulson wrote: > For a while I even joined the Dozenal Society, which advocates for base-12. >  Base-12 has the advantage (over base-10 and base-16) of many divisors, so > division radix notation (to the right of the radix point) is easier. I once thought

RE: Hexadecimal digits

> Classical computing has always defined a kilobyte as 1024 bytes. > I reject SI's attempt to force their broken system on what is an > established de facto standard. This is indeed trollery. SI and "kilo" and the decimal system have been around far, far longer than so-called "classical computing

RE: Hexadecimal digits

"Luke-Jr" wrote: >> Shouldn't this be an FAQ? > > If it's Frequent, shouldn't that imply there's enough people who want > it to warrant inclusion in Unicode? ;) It means there are enough people who are misinformed about whether a universal character encoding should be a tool to advance individu

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 5 Jun 2010, at 00:04, Luke-Jr wrote: > While it is natural for glyphs to change, artificial character sets are not > unheard of. Piffle. All writing systems are artefacts. > For example, Korean was designed such that each character, representing a > syllable, was composed of sub-characters

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 5 Jun 2010, at 00:04, Luke-Jr wrote: On Friday 04 June 2010 04:45:57 pm Hans Aberg wrote: Hexadecimal representation is only used to give a compact representation of binary numbers in connection of computers. In view of modern fast computers, one only needs to write out numbers when interfac

Overloading Unicode

I've noticed a common thread this week. Sinnathurai Srivas wrote: > Allow linear display [of Tamil], when a font is designed for that > purpose. (The other is complex rendered contemporary display). Linear > display can be used for some time to come, while the Government passes > a decree for a "

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 06/04/2010 03:10 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: On Friday 04 June 2010 01:28:21 pm Rick McGowan wrote: Just out of curiosity, why do you think it's useful or important for people to use hexadecimal as their primary system of counting? What advantages would it confer? John W. Nystrom went over the nume

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 04:16:46 pm John H. Jenkins wrote: > On Jun 4, 2010, at 2:48 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > > The computer industry already has units of 'kilobyte' and such referring > > to powers of 1024. > > You mean, of course, kibibyte. A kilobyte is 1000 bytes. Classical computing has always d

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 04:49:42 pm Shawn Steele wrote: > Shouldn't this be an FAQ? If it's Frequent, shouldn't that imply there's enough people who want it to warrant inclusion in Unicode? ;)

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 04:45:57 pm Hans Aberg wrote: > Hexadecimal representation is only used to give a compact > representation of binary numbers in connection of computers. In view > of modern fast computers, one only needs to write out numbers when > interfacing with humans. Then one can easily

RE: Hexadecimal digits

Shouldn't this be an FAQ? -Original Message- From: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Michael Everson Sent: Poʻalima, Iune 04, 2010 12:01 PM To: unicode Unicode Discussion Subject: Re: Hexadecimal digits On 4 Jun 2010, at 20:39, Luke-Jr wrote: >

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 4 Jun 2010, at 20:39, Luke-Jr wrote: Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should base 16 be denied unique characters? Anyway, if you can show these John Nystrom Tonal System glyphs have been in textual use, perhaps they should be encoded. From another perspective,

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Jun 4, 2010, at 2:48 PM, Luke-Jr wrote: > The computer industry already has units of 'kilobyte' and such referring to > powers of 1024. > You mean, of course, kibibyte. A kilobyte is 1000 bytes.

Re: Hexadecimal digits

I was at high school in England a few years prior to the currency decimalization. A teacher argued that the then current system of 12 pennies to a shilling and 20 shillings to a pound was superior to the proposed 100 new pence to the pound because 12 was divisible by 2 - 3 - 4 - 6 and 10 only by 2

Micmac hieroglyphs - proposal in progress

Hello all, I'm also interested in the prospects for encoding a character set, though in my case it's about the Micmac hieroglyphs (which, unlike portable objects or hexadecimal digits, are currently in the Roadmap and do have established usage (mostly historical)). I not too long ago started work

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 03:26:45 pm Philippe Verdy wrote: > The real need would be is we started to count, in our natural life, in > a binary system like hexadecimal: there would still be the need to use > it unambiguously with decimal numbers, so that numbers written like > "10" would still remain

Re: Hexadecimal digits

"Luke-Jr" > A : unicode@unicode.org > Copie à : "John Dlugosz" , "Otto Stolz" > > Objet : Re: Hexadecimal digits > > On Friday 04 June 2010 11:55:55 am John Dlugosz wrote: > > Those things really happen when writing in assembly language. I recall > > having to write "numbers" that only begin w

Re: Hexadecimal digits

We don't add nonce characters to the standard just because someone thinks they'd be a good idea; there needs to be established usage by a substantial user community. We established a huge range (over 100,000 characters) for private use. You (or William Overington, for example) are free to define a

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 4 Jun 2010, at 21:35, Luke-Jr wrote: >> One mentioned 0123456789ABCDEF, and the fact that one has software already >> which does sums in this hexadecimal notation. > > That works for software, but not so much for human communication. At the risk of Her Divine Effulgence's wrath, all I can s

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Unicode has Roman numerals for compatibility reasons, not for serious use as Roman numerals. If you *really* want to work with roman numerals, even in the year MMDCCLXIII AUC, use the letters, just like the Romans did. And in any event, you're undermining your own case, because a *lot* of socie

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 02:23:46 pm Michael Everson wrote: > On 4 Jun 2010, at 21:14, Luke-Jr wrote: > > Sumerian is basically bar counting, and the others are all base 10. > > Hardly a wide variety, just different symbols meaning the same thing. > > None of which provide 16 digits needed for a hexa

Re: Hexadecimal digits

"Luke-Jr" wrote: > Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should base 16 be > denied unique characters? The Roman numeral characters starting at U+2160 are compatibility characters. They exist in Unicode only because they existed in one or more of the other character sets us

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Luke wrote: > I also plan to teach it as the primary numerical system in my home-school > curriculum (mainly for my own children, of which I thus far have four) What a lovely gift to give your children. Of course, they'll be unable to balance their chequebooks in that dreadful monkey-fingered

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 4 Jun 2010, at 21:14, Luke-Jr wrote: >> A wide variety of numeric systems ***IS*** supported in the UCS. You can do >> sums in Sumerian and Egyptian and Linear B and Phoenician and lots of other >> numeric systems. > > Sumerian is basically bar counting, and the others are all base 10. Hardl

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 02:00:34 pm Michael Everson wrote: > A wide variety of numeric systems ***IS*** supported in the UCS. You can do > sums in Sumerian and Egyptian and Linear B and Phoenician and lots of > other numeric systems. Sumerian is basically bar counting, and the others are all base

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 01:28:21 pm Rick McGowan wrote: > People use complicated and potentially confusing systems all the time > because to not use them would mean that (a) they can no longer communicate > with everyone else and/or (b) they would represent an unnecessary > discontinuity with all pa

RE: Hexadecimal digits

The classic: "Time flies like an arrow" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language_processing Jony > -Original Message- > From: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On > Behalf Of John Dlugosz > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 9:18 PM > To: Luke-Jr; unicode@unic

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 4 Jun 2010, at 20:39, Luke-Jr wrote: > Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should base 16 be > denied unique characters? It isn't. 0123456789ABCDEF. I have calculators which do sums with this notation. > Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should b

RE: Least used parts of BMP.

> Message du 04/06/10 18:30 > De : "Doug Ewell" > A : "Mark Davis ☕" > Copie à : unicode@unicode.org, "Otto Stolz" > Objet : RE: Least used parts of BMP. > > > Mark Davis ☕ replied to Otto Stolz dot Stolz at uni dash konstanz dot de>: > > >> The problem with this encoding is that the trailing

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should base 16 be denied unique characters? >From another perspective, the English-language Arabic-numeral world came up with ASCII. Unicode was created to unlimit the character set to include coverage of other languages' characters. Wh

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Luke-jr wrote, Hexadecimal/tonal will never be popularised as long as it can be confused with letters... and But I'm not talking about programming languages, just common everyday uses by people who have it as their primary (not secondary) system of numbers. Hexadecimal already is pop

RE: Hexadecimal digits

"The green can..." (Adjective Noun?) "The green can be watered after it has been cut." (Green is noun, Can is aux verb!) It's not limited to numbers. > -Original Message- > From: Luke-Jr [mailto:l...@dashjr.org] > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 12:47 PM > To: unicode@unicode.org > Cc: John

Re: Hexadecimal digits

> But again, I'm not talking about programming. My four year old can grasp > tonal > just as well as she could decimal had I been teaching that. Now if I were > using the a-f notation, she would be (reasonably) confused as to why *some* > numbers are unique, but *other* numbers are also letter

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 12:43:33 pm Kenneth Whistler wrote: > And that is why prefixes such as "0x" were invented, so as > to disambiguate explicitly in contexts where syntax or > explicit type do not. Ordinary language usage wouldn't ordinarily > countenance this kind of ambiguity anyway -- it is a

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 11:55:55 am John Dlugosz wrote: > Those things really happen when writing in assembly language. I recall > having to write "numbers" that only begin with a decimal digit, so "a > fish" is a word, and "0ah fish" is a number. In C and C++, "a" is a word > and "0xa" is a nu

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 09:22:51 am Mark E. Shoulson wrote: > Suggestions to encode A-F as digits and not numbers crop up here every > few years. This is the first I've heard of the tonal system, but the > suggestion of encoding the hex digits as distinct characters I have > definitely seen on this

Re: Hexadecimal digits

> On Friday 04 June 2010 08:51:05 am Otto Stolz wrote: > > In any case, you have to know the base of every number > > you are going to parse. This stems from the fact that > > the same digits are used for all number systems. Luke-Jr replied: > > But you first need to know if it is a number or a

Re: Least used parts of BMP.

On 6/4/2010 8:34 AM, Mark Davis ☕ wrote: In a compression format, that doesn't matter; you can't expect random access, nor many of the other features of UTF-8. The minimal expectation for these kinds of simple compression is that when you write a string with a particular /write/ method, and th

Re: Emoji (was: Re: Preparing a proposal for encoding a portable interpretable object code into Unicode)

On 4 Jun 2010, at 10:47, William_J_G Overington wrote: > I noticed the use of colours other than black and white in several groups of > emoji. No, you have noticed the use of the strings ASCII RED and GREEN and BLUE and ORANGE in some UCS character names. > What I find interesting is that colo

RE: Least used parts of BMP.

> -Original Message- > From: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On > Behalf Of Doug Ewell > > That said, if Kannan were to go with the alternative format suggested > on > this list: > > 0xxx > 1xxx 0yyy > 1xxx 1yyy 0zzz > > then he wo

RE: Hexadecimal digits

Those things really happen when writing in assembly language. I recall having to write "numbers" that only begin with a decimal digit, so "a fish" is a word, and "0ah fish" is a number. In C and C++, "a" is a word and "0xa" is a number. > -Original Message- > From: unicode-bou...@unico

RE: A question about "user areas"

> It really IS a factor, when most users use it instead of the original > script (this is especially true for Klingonists). There is content which is not transliterated to Latin. Not that you couldn't transliterate it if you want, but there is content which isn't automagically mirrored in Latin

RE: A question about "user areas"

> De : "Shawn Steele" > A : "verd...@wanadoo.fr" , "vanis...@boil.afraid.org" > , "unicode@unicode.org" > Copie à : > Objet : RE: A question about "user areas" > > > Anyway, most existing supporters of Tengwar and Cirth (also > > Klingonists) still use some transliteration > > Transliterateabili

RE: Least used parts of BMP.

Mark Davis ☕ replied to Otto Stolz : >> The problem with this encoding is that the trailing bytes >> are not clearly marked: they may start with any of >> '0', '10', or '110'; only '111' would mark a byte >> unambiguously as a trailing one. >> >> In contrast, in UTF-8 every single byte carries a

Re: Least used parts of BMP.

In a compression format, that doesn't matter; you can't expect random access, nor many of the other features of UTF-8. The minimal expectation for these kinds of simple compression is that when you write a string with a particular *write* method, and then read it back with the corresponding *read*

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On 06/04/2010 09:58 AM, Luke-Jr wrote: On Friday 04 June 2010 08:51:05 am Otto Stolz wrote: In any case, you have to know the base of every number you are going to parse. This stems from the fact that the same digits are used for all number systems. But you first need to know if it is a number

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 08:51:05 am Otto Stolz wrote: > In any case, you have to know the base of every number > you are going to parse. This stems from the fact that > the same digits are used for all number systems. But you first need to know if it is a number or a word. Can you drink cafe coffee

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Hello Luke-Jr, please keep the discussion on the list. I had written: Simply use the digits “0” through “9”, and the letters “A” through “F”; You have written: This makes it more complex to differentiate between numbers and letters/units/etc. In any case, you have to know the base of every

Re: Least used parts of BMP.

Hello, Am 2010-06-03 07:07, schrieb Kannan Goundan: This is currently what I do (I was referring to this as the "compact UTF-8-like encoding"). The one difference is that I put all the marker bits in the first byte (instead of in the high bit of every byte): 0xxx 10xx xyyy

Re: Hexadecimal digits

On Friday 04 June 2010 06:32:06 am you wrote: > Simply use the digits “0” through “9”, and the > letters “A” through “F”; cf. > . This makes it more complex to differentiate between numbers and letters/units/etc. > I do not know, how successfu

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Otto Stolz wrote: I do not know, how successful Nystroms proposal has been, The Wikipedia page says, "This first hexadecimal system, proposed in the 19th century, had no success at all." -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-l

Re: Emoji (was: Re: Preparing a proposal for encoding a portable interpretable object code into Unicode)

William_J_G Overington wrote: On Wednesday 2 June 2010, Doug Ewell wrote: However, the emoji proposal became far less objectionable (at least to me) when color and animation ceased to be considered as defining characteristics of plain-text characters, ... I noticed the use of colours other

Re: Hexadecimal digits

Hello Luke-Jr, you’ve been asking: Are there any hexadecimal digits in Unicode? Simply use the digits “0” through “9”, and the letters “A” through “F”; cf. . For example, perhaps the digits used for John W. Nystrom's Tonal System? I had

Re: Emoji (was: Re: Preparing a proposal for encoding a portable interpretable object code into Unicode)

On Wednesday 2 June 2010, Doug Ewell wrote: > However, the emoji proposal became far less objectionable > (at least to me) when color and animation ceased to be > considered as defining characteristics of plain-text > characters, ... I noticed the use of colours other than black and white in s