On 8 Nov 2012, at 03:10, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> We encode *characters*, glyphs that people use (yes, I know I conflated
> glyphs and characters there.) There are many rating systems out there, yes,
> but we also don't have to please everyone. I think half-stars see enough
> in-print usage
2012/11/8 William_J_G Overington :
> However, an encoding using a Private Use Area encoding has great problems in
> being implemented as a widespread system.
Wrong, this is what has been made during centuries if not millenium !
Initially a private use definition, which was not "encoded", but foun
On 8 Nov 2012, at 09:59, Simon Montagu wrote:
> Please take into account that the half-stars should be symmetric-swapped in
> RTL text. I attach an example from an advertisment for a movie published in
> Haaretz 2 November 2012
I don't think Geometric Shapes have the mirror property.
2605;BL
On 2012/11/08 19:15, Michael Everson wrote:
On 8 Nov 2012, at 09:59, Simon Montagu wrote:
Please take into account that the half-stars should be symmetric-swapped in RTL
text. I attach an example from an advertisment for a movie published in Haaretz
2 November 2012
I don't think Geometric
Also the asymmetric geometric shapes don't have the mirror-property (it is restricted to parentheses and mathematical operators). That's the reason why I have proposed two characters instead of only one. Adding the mirror property to the bicolor staronly would violate the "minimum surprise princip
One key criteris for inclusion in Unicode is that a character or symbol be
in circulation. Whether these are hand written, printed or electronic. If
one creates a new a new character then one first must get others to use it,
this takes time.
John
On 8 Nov 2012 14:57, "William_J_G Overington"
wrot
Le 08/11/2012 09:47, Michael Everson a écrit :
I agree, and will write a proposal if anyone cares to send me examples of
in-print usage. (XKCD's handwritten chart kind of doesn't count…)
Except that the simple fact that a well known satirical comics like XKCD
includes these half-stars in this c
I'm not sure I follow this analysis.
A./
On 11/8/2012 1:30 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
2012/11/8 William_J_G Overington :
However, an encoding using a Private Use Area encoding has great problems in
being implemented as a widespread system.
Wrong, this is what has been made during centuries i
On 11/8/2012 2:27 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
On 2012/11/08 19:15, Michael Everson wrote:
On 8 Nov 2012, at 09:59, Simon Montagu wrote:
Please take into account that the half-stars should be
symmetric-swapped in RTL text. I attach an example from an
advertisment for a movie published in Haa
Den 2012-11-08 14:34, skrev "Asmus Freytag" :
> On 11/8/2012 2:27 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
>> On 2012/11/08 19:15, Michael Everson wrote:
>>> On 8 Nov 2012, at 09:59, Simon Montagu wrote:
>>>
Please take into account that the half-stars should be
symmetric-swapped in RTL text. I a
On 8 Nov 2012, at 22:54, Kent Karlsson wrote:
2605;BLACK STAR;So;0;ON;N;
2606;WHITE STAR;So;0;ON;N;
>
> The *chart* glyphs for these aren't same-sized (outer outline)…
So?
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
2012/11/7 Jean-François Colson :
> You missed
> NEGLECTABLE RATING +
>
> NO RATING
For this one, would it be a greyed star (meaning no info, N/A) or the
existing WHITE STAR for the minimum rating (the maximum rating being
the BLACK STAR) ?
Usually, we see the high ratings displayed as multipl
Den 2012-11-09 00:09, skrev "Michael Everson" :
> On 8 Nov 2012, at 22:54, Kent Karlsson wrote:
>
> 2605;BLACK STAR;So;0;ON;N;
> 2606;WHITE STAR;So;0;ON;N;
>>
>> The *chart* glyphs for these aren't same-sized (outer outline)
>
> So?
It is quite common to fill up to
On 11/8/2012 3:40 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
Usually, we see the high ratings displayed as multiple stars, that are
either present or absent, but rarely half filled.
Half filled stars are relatively common, whenever there are fractional
star ratings possible.
Stars are among the most common s
On 11/08/2012 01:48 AM, William_J_G Overington wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
< ... collect examples of these in print ...
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
We don't encode "it would be nice/useful." We encode *characters*, glyphs that
people use (yes, I know I conflated glyphs and characters there.
On 11/08/2012 05:54 PM, Kent Karlsson wrote:
Well, define 3 (4?) brand new characters of g.c. Sm, and the "half" one(s)
(and quarter ones, if those are included too) have the bidi mirrored
property... There are plenty of g.c. Sm chars that are bidi mirrored.
(E.g. 27E2-27E3, ⟢ ⟣ , which are four
Den 2012-11-09 01:22, skrev "Asmus Freytag" :
> On 11/8/2012 3:40 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>> Usually, we see the high ratings displayed as multiple stars, that are
>> either present or absent, but rarely half filled.
>
> Half filled stars are relatively common, whenever there are fractional
>
Mark E. Shoulson wrote: Mirroring tends to be done for glyphs
that are used in *pairs*,
open/close things and such.
Not invariably; consider the integral and summation. They don't have mirrored
counterparts and many other mathematical symbols don't either.
Murray
Mirroring tends to be done for glyphs that are used in *pairs*,
open/close things and such.
Not invariably; consider the integral and summation. They don't have mirrored
counterparts and many other mathematical symbols don't either.
The summation and integral signs are not used in pairs, but
On 11/8/2012 4:42 PM, Kent Karlsson wrote:
Den 2012-11-09 01:22, skrev "Asmus Freytag" :
On 11/8/2012 3:40 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote:
Usually, we see the high ratings displayed as multiple stars, that are
either present or absent, but rarely half filled.
Half filled stars are relatively common
On 11/8/2012 4:53 PM, Murray Sargent wrote:
Mark E. Shoulson wrote: Mirroring tends to be done for glyphs
that are used in *pairs*,
open/close things and such.
Not invariably; consider the integral and summation. They don't have mirrored
counterparts and many other mathematical symbols don't
On 11/8/2012 4:39 PM, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
On 11/08/2012 01:48 AM, William_J_G Overington wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
< ... collect examples of these in print ...
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
We don't encode "it would be nice/useful." We encode *characters*,
glyphs that people use (yes, I
On 11/08/2012 09:00 PM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
On 11/8/2012 4:39 PM, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
I stand by it: we don't encode what would be cool to have. We encode
what people *use*.
Actually, there are certain instances where characters are encoded
based on expected usage.
...
What these e
23 matches
Mail list logo
