On 10/15/2011 05:19 PM, Andreas Prilop wrote:
I return to
http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2011-m10/att-0059/1999-12-31.html
Microsoft programs (Internet Explorer, MS Word), display this as
31/12/1999
Other programs (Firefox, Opera, OpenOffice) display this as
1999/12/31
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 08:42:02 +0200
From: Simon Montagu smont...@smontagu.org
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
On 10/15/2011 05:19 PM, Andreas Prilop wrote:
I return to
http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2011-m10/att-0059/1999-12-31.html
Microsoft programs (Internet
Perhaps the idea of something embedded in the text that then controls
the display of the subsequent run of text is the very definition of
markup, whether or not that markup is a special character or an
ASCII sequence like /spanspan style=gait:xxx; or /spanspan
style=font:xxx;.
On Mon, Oct 17,
On 10/17/2011 10:08 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 08:42:02 +0200
From: Simon Montagusmont...@smontagu.org
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
On 10/15/2011 05:19 PM, Andreas Prilop wrote:
I return to
Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org:
Btw, according to my testing, the current Firefox displays this as
31/12/1999. I don't have Opera or OO to check there, but it's possible
that the OP was using old versions of these that were still using the
old Unicode data base.
It still displays as
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:35:39 +0200
From: Simon Montagu smont...@smontagu.org
CC: unicode@unicode.org
Sorry, I think I confused you here. I quoted the expected rendering in
ASCII digits, but the testcase in fact uses Arabic-Indic digits.
There's no difference in rendering of ASCII
Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org:
However, it could be that the confusion is mine, and it stems from the
fact that the logical order of these characters was not stated by the
OP. Is it
1999/12/31
or
31/12/1999
?
The logical order in the document that was cited is 1999/12/31
(١٩٩٩/١٢/٣١). I
the SIL PUA
(http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsiid=PUA_home) is
slowly being absorbed into TUS
one character yet to be added is the U+F1BC MODIFIER LETTER SMALL H WITH STROKE
the chart for Latin Extended-D
(http://www.unicode.org/Public/6.1.0/charts/blocks/UA720.pdf) has
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:40:02 +0100
From: Peter Krefting pe...@opera.com
Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org:
Btw, according to my testing, the current Firefox displays this as
31/12/1999. I don't have Opera or OO to check there, but it's possible
that the OP was using old versions of
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:09:06 +0100
From: Peter Krefting pe...@opera.com
Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org:
However, it could be that the confusion is mine, and it stems from the
fact that the logical order of these characters was not stated by the
OP. Is it
1999/12/31
or
Attn: Mark E. Shoulson
C/o Magda Danish
Sr Administrative Director
Unicode Inc
mark @ kli.org,
v-mag...@microsoft.com
Appended are 3 threads in reverse chronological order highlighting
Unicode Inc had in the past copied some letters/symbols from Greek
script and then
I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in further correspondence from
you, and will consider any further communications from you to be harassment.
On 2011-10-16 20:24, Tulasi wrote:
Attn: Peter Zilahy Ingerman, PhD
C/o Magda Danish
Sr Administrative Director
Unicode Inc
Attn: Chridtopher Fynn
C/o Magda Danish
Sr Administrative Director
Unicode Inc
chris.f...@gmail.com,
v-mag...@microsoft.com,
Appended are 3 threads in reverse chronological order highlighting
Unicode Inc had in the past copied some letters/symbols from Greek
script and
Attn: vanisaac
C/o Magda Danish
Sr Administrative Director
Unicode Inc
vanis...@boil.afraid.org,
v-mag...@microsoft.com,
Appended are 3 threads in reverse chronological order highlighting
Unicode Inc had in the past copied some letters/symbols from Greek
script and then
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
However, it could be that the confusion is mine, and it stems
from the fact that the logical order of these characters was not
stated by the OP.
You can read the source text, no?
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Btw, according to my testing, the current Firefox displays this
this is
http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2011-m10/att-0059/1999-12-31.html
as 31/12/1999.
Firefox 7 displays 1999/12/31.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 18:08:46 +0200 (CEST)
From: Andreas Prilop prilop4...@trashmail.net
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Btw, according to my testing, the current Firefox displays this
this is
On 10/17/2011 1:23 AM, Peter Cyrus wrote:
Perhaps the idea of something embedded in the text that then controls
the display of the subsequent run of text is the very definition of
markup, whether or not that markup is a special character or an
ASCII sequence like/spanspan style=gait:xxx;
It's been done already : the International Phonetic Alphabet. If we
all just wrote in that, it would make Unicode much easier to
implement, too.
I'm just working on Plan B, just in case.
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Ken Whistler k...@sybase.com wrote:
On 10/17/2011 1:23 AM, Peter Cyrus
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 05:57:33 +0200
Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org wrote:
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 22:47:08 +0100
From: Richard Wordingham richard.wording...@ntlworld.com
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
HTML 4.0 and 4.0.1 Section 8.2 Paragraph 3 Section 2 states, If a
document does not
pHellobrI remembered hearing about a quick and easy solution right away I
took advantage of this now people have a new found respect for me trust me this
is no jokebra
Your idea of propagation seems worth exploring - thanks!
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Richard Wordingham
richard.wording...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:37:20 +0200
Peter Cyrus pcy...@alivox.net wrote:
Perhaps, awkwardly. But that is ultimately equivalent to marking the
22 matches
Mail list logo
