Am Montag, den 30.04.2012, 09:09 -0700 schrieb David Starner:
> I think there's exactly zero chance that Unicode will separate two
> characters that have been unified for the entire history of Unicode
> and used for terabytes, possibly petabytes, of data. Like many of the
> things inherited from A
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 23:43 -0700 schrieb Asmus Freytag:
> Even if some minutiae of glyph selection are left to a font, the
> problem is often that there's no specification as to what certain
> languages need, so that fonts cannot be expected to provide the
> correct implementation.
Strange
In the case of the Carrier syllabics, I have never seen an example of
vertical text so there is no native usage to go by. However, as others have
said, rotated text is very difficult to read because of the role of
orientation. It's true that the small characters provide evidence as to the
direction
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> the `babel' package
and later:
> Typographically correct quotation is a quite difficult topic.
which I found ironic.
>> So if two glyphs have enough "visual character" to be used in one
>> document to express two different meanings, then they should be
>> encoded as d
> So if two glyphs have enough "visual character" to be used in one
> document to express two different meanings, then they should be
> encoded as different characters?
Yes, more or less. However, quotation characters need language
tagging or something like that; you certainly don't want to have
On 5/2/2012 5:20 AM, Michael Probst wrote:
Am Montag, den 30.04.2012, 16:59 +0200 schrieb Andreas Prilop:
Actually, the case is quite simple.
Alas, it isn't :-) Or why is it that the discussion you pointed me at
(Danke!) quickly strayed from the topic, got hotter than useful and
seems to have l
On 5/2/2012 8:33 AM, Michael Probst wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 23:43 -0700 schrieb Asmus Freytag:
Even if some minutiae of glyph selection are left to a font, the problem
is often that there's no specification as to what certain languages
need, so that fonts cannot be expected to provide
Am Sonntag, den 29.04.2012, 23:43 -0700 schrieb Asmus Freytag:
> Even if some minutiae of glyph selection are left to a font, the problem
> is often that there's no specification as to what certain languages
> need, so that fonts cannot be expected to provide the correct
> implementation.
>
> W
Christian,
Just wondering why the time zone reference is not given in a universal format,
like UTC±n, so one in other part of the world can calculate.
That's 0700 GMT on Friday.
For others: http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/
Rick
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 08:04:01AM -0700, Doug Ewell wrote:
> Certain font designers have made these directional for decades, leading
> to the hideous ``convention'' which some people seem to love, but which
> is a classic example of abusing character encoding to achieve
> typographical results.
T
Am Freitag, den 27.04.2012, 18:01 +0200 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> 2) There might be different quotation characters within a document,
> meaning different things. In other words, there are documents
> where the distinction between various quotation marks is more than
> a glyph variant
Michael Probst wrote:
> The real error may be that U+0022 is not
> neutral in relation to design of the rest of the font.
U+0022 is supposed to be entirely neutral from a vertical standpoint.
See NamesList.txt:
> 0022 QUOTATION MARK
>* neutral (vertical), used as opening or closing qu
Am Montag, den 30.04.2012, 16:59 +0200 schrieb Andreas Prilop:
> Actually, the case is quite simple.
Alas, it isn't :-) Or why is it that the discussion you pointed me at
(Danke!) quickly strayed from the topic, got hotter than useful and
seems to have lead to no result regarding the original pro
From: "Cristian Secară"
Just wondering why the time zone reference is not given in a universal
format, like UTC±n, so one in other part of the world can calculate.
Excellent point !
Raymond Mercier
În data de Tue, 01 May 2012 16:06:27 -0700, Rick McGowan a scris:
> Due to some electrical work, the Unicode web servers will be off line
> for as much as 2 hours 2am to 4am US Central time, Friday May 4.
Just wondering why the time zone reference is not given in a universal
format, like UTC±n,
15 matches
Mail list logo
